Background
Primary health care (PHC) professionals may play a crucial role in improving early diagnosis of depressive disorders. However, only 50% of cases are detected in PHC. The most widely used screening instrument for major depression is the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ), including the two-, eight- and nine-item versions. Surprisingly, there is neither enough evidence about the validity of PHQ in PHC patients in Spain nor indications about how to interpret the total scores. This study aimed to gather validity evidence to support the use of the three PHQ versions to screen for major depression in PHC in Spain. Additionally, the present study provided information for helping professionals to choose the best PHQ version according to the context.
Methods
The sample was composed of 2579 participants from 22 Spanish PHC centers participating in the EIRA-3 study. The reliability and validity of the three PHQ versions for Spanish PHC patients were assessed based on responses to the questionnaire.
Results
The PHQ-8 and PHQ-9 showed high internal consistency. The results obtained confirm the theoretically expected relationship between PHQ results and anxiety, social support and health-related QoL. A single-factor solution was confirmed. Regarding to the level of agreement with the CIDI interview (used as the criterion), our results indicate that the PHQ has a good discrimination power. The optimal cut-off values were: ⩾2 for PHQ-2, ⩾7 for PHQ-8 and ⩾8 for PHQ-9.
Conclusions
PHQ is a good and valuable tool for detecting major depression in PHC patients in Spain.
Postpartum depression (PPD) is one of the most common disorders following childbirth. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SR/MA) aimed to assess the effectiveness of psychological interventions in preventing PPD in non-depressed women. PRISMA guidelines were followed. MEDLINE (Ovid and PubMed), PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, CENTRAL, OpenGrey, Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry and clinicaltrial.gov were searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted with pregnant or postpartum (up to 12 months) women who were non-depressed at baseline were selected. The outcomes were the incidence of PPD and/or the reduction of postpartum depressive symptoms. The standardized mean difference (SMD) using random-effect models was calculated. Sensitivity, sub-group and meta-regression analyses were performed. 17 RCTs were included in the SR and 15 in the MA, representing 4958 participants from four continents. The pooled SMD was −0.175 [95% confidence interval (CI) −0.266 to −0.083; p < 0.001] and sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of this result. Heterogeneity was low (I2 = 21.20%) and was fully explained by a meta-regression model including one variable (previous deliveries). The meta-regression model and MA stratified by previous deliveries indicated that interventions focused on primiparous women are more effective. There was no evidence of publication bias. Few RCTs had an overall low risk of bias. According to GRADE, the quality of evidence was moderate. Psychological interventions have very little effectiveness in preventing PPD in non-depressed women, although this effectiveness is greater in interventions focused on primiparous women. Further RCTs with a low risk of bias and more effective interventions are needed.
This study aims to systematically review all Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) with recommendations for peripartum depression in European countries.Methods: A systematic review according to the PRISMA statement was conducted. CPGs focussing on peripartum depression or with at least one specific recommendation for peripartum depression from European countries were selected. Searching was conducted in electronic databases (MEDLINE and PsycINFO), and by contacting professional societies and international experts until November 24th, 2021. Characteristics of the included CPGs and their
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.