4.7 Article

The prevalence of perinatal depression and its associated factors in two different settings in Brazil

期刊

JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS
卷 136, 期 3, 页码 1204-1208

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2011.11.023

关键词

Depression; High-risk pregnancy; Postpartum; Risk factors

资金

  1. CNPq (the Brazilian National Research Council), through MCT/CNPq [14/2009, 476008/2009-3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The prevalence of antepartum and postpartum depression (PPD) and its association with certain risk factors was evaluated. Method: The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) was applied and sociodemographic data was obtained at the beginning of the third trimester of pregnancy and at 4-6 weeks postpartum. Results: The prevalence of depression was 24.3% during pregnancy (n=600 women) and 10.8% in the postpartum period (n = 555). The factors independently associated with antepartum depression were the absence of a partner (PRadj 1.93; 95%CI: 1.44-2.58), a lower socioeconomic class (1.75; 1.18-2.60), being non-white (1.48; 1.09-2.01) and multiparity (1.32; 1.01-1.74). For postpartum depression, the factors were the occurrence of psychological violence (PRadj 3.31; 95%CI: 2.02-5.43), use of alcohol during pregnancy (2.14; 1.33-3.45), being nonwhite (1.85; 1.11-3.08) and physical violence (2.14; 1.13-4.08). The sensitivity of depression during pregnancy as a predictor of PPD was 75%, while specificity was 81%. There were no differences between the two settings. Limitations: EDPS does not diagnose depression and as a screening instrument it could overestimate the true prevalence of depression. Conclusions: The use of the EPDS instrument during pregnancy would allow a screening for identifying women at higher risk of developing PPD and then a proposal of specific interventions to manage this condition. Postpartum depression was prevalent in around 10% of the women and was associated with unfavorable sociodemographic conditions including the use of alcohol and with the occurrence of psychological and physical violence. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据