4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Efficiency of a two-item pre-screen to reduce the burden of depression screening in pregnancy and postpartum: An IMPLICIT network study

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN BOARD OF FAMILY MEDICINE
Volume 21, Issue 4, Pages 317-325

Publisher

AMER BOARD FAMILY MEDICINE
DOI: 10.3122/jabfm.2008.04.080048

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [1K23HD048915-01A2, K23 HD048915] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [R03 MH074750-02, R03 MH074750, 1R03MH074750-01] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: Systems for efficient case finding of women with major depression during pregnancy and postpartum are needed. Here we assess the diagnostic accuracy of a modified 2-item patient health questionnaire (PHQ-2) as a pre-screen in assessing depression. Methods: Cross-sectional assessments at 15 weeks' gestation (n = 414), 30 weeks' gestation (n = 334), and 6 to 16 weeks postpartum (n = 193) among women from a diverse set of races/ethnicities, participating in the IMPLICIT maternal care quality improvement network. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale score (>= 13) was used as the criterion measure for the PHQ-2. Results: A positive 2-item screen had sensitivity of 93%, 82%, and 80% and specificity of 75%, 80%, and 86% for Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale score of >= 13 for assessment at 15 and 30 weeks gestational age and postpartum, respectively. The positive/negative predictive values for the PHQ-2 were 44/98, 24/91, and 30/98 for each time point, respectively. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis suggested that 2-item assessments at each time point had approximately equal diagnostic validity. Conclusions: Two questions were efficient to rule out depression and reduced the need for further screening of approximately 60% to 80% of women, depending on the point in pregnancy or postpartum. A diagnostic interview follow-up of women screening positive is still required.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available