Other Titles
Promoting Health for Those Suffering From Depression
Abstract
Session presented on Thursday, July 21, 2016: Purpose: A review of screening instruments for depression for use in antenatal services in low resource settings was conducted. It is important to assess methodological quality of articles which reported psychometrics of an instrument because gives insight in quality of study designs. A good instrument should have high sensitivity and specificity which makes it effective in ruling in pregnant women with depression and ruling out those who do not have. The aim of the review was to appraise the evidence on sensitivity and specificity of screening instruments for depression and recommend a suitable tool for use in antenatal services in low resource settings. Methods: The questions for this review were: (1) what is the methodological quality of articles for validated screening instruments for depression in antenatal in low resource settings? and (2) which instruments would be recommended for use in antenatal care services in low resource settings? Search terms were identifed relevant to databases and included "depression" AND "screening" AND "antenatal". Databases, namely ScienceDirect, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, SABINET and PsychARTICLES were searched. Searching, quality assessment using the QUADAS, selection and data abstraction was done by two reviewers. Studies were evaluated for relevancy using PICO and whether they reported sensitivity, specificity and Area Under Receivers' Operator Characteristics (AUROC) curve. Pooling of sensitivity of instruments was done using a forest plot. Results: Eleven articles were included in the review. Their methodological quality ranged from adequate to excellent. There were variations in level of accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), Beck Depression Index, Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, Hopkins Symptoms Checklist-25, Kessler Psychological Distress Scale and Self-Reporting Questionnaire 20. EPDS had highest level of accuracy (AUROC=.965) and sensitivity (1). Conclusion: The review considered instruments for screening depression in antenatal in low resource settings. Articles which reported accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for screening instruments were assessed for methodological quality. This review suggests that EPDS can be a suitable instrument of preference for screening antenatal depression in low resource settings because its level of accuracy ranged from moderate to high in various settings. The EPDS had the high level of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and it was validated by studies which had either good or excellent methodological quality. However, it is crucial that the instrument is validated using methodologically rigorous studies before use in a particular setting.
Sigma Membership
Chi Xi at-Large
Type
Presentation
Format Type
Text-based Document
Study Design/Type
N/A
Research Approach
N/A
Keywords:
Depression, Antenatal Screening, Systematic Review
Recommended Citation
Sungani, Genesis Chorwe and Chipps, Jennifer A., "A systematic review of screening instruments for depression in antenatal services in low resource settings" (2016). INRC (Congress). 204.
https://www.sigmarepository.org/inrc/2016/presentations_2016/204
Conference Name
27th International Nursing Research Congress
Conference Host
Sigma Theta Tau International
Conference Location
Cape Town, South Africa
Conference Year
2016
Rights Holder
All rights reserved by the author(s) and/or publisher(s) listed in this item record unless relinquished in whole or part by a rights notation or a Creative Commons License present in this item record.
All permission requests should be directed accordingly and not to the Sigma Repository.
All submitting authors or publishers have affirmed that when using material in their work where they do not own copyright, they have obtained permission of the copyright holder prior to submission and the rights holder has been acknowledged as necessary.
Review Type
Abstract Review Only: Reviewed by Event Host
Acquisition
Proxy-submission
A systematic review of screening instruments for depression in antenatal services in low resource settings
Cape Town, South Africa
Session presented on Thursday, July 21, 2016: Purpose: A review of screening instruments for depression for use in antenatal services in low resource settings was conducted. It is important to assess methodological quality of articles which reported psychometrics of an instrument because gives insight in quality of study designs. A good instrument should have high sensitivity and specificity which makes it effective in ruling in pregnant women with depression and ruling out those who do not have. The aim of the review was to appraise the evidence on sensitivity and specificity of screening instruments for depression and recommend a suitable tool for use in antenatal services in low resource settings. Methods: The questions for this review were: (1) what is the methodological quality of articles for validated screening instruments for depression in antenatal in low resource settings? and (2) which instruments would be recommended for use in antenatal care services in low resource settings? Search terms were identifed relevant to databases and included "depression" AND "screening" AND "antenatal". Databases, namely ScienceDirect, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, SABINET and PsychARTICLES were searched. Searching, quality assessment using the QUADAS, selection and data abstraction was done by two reviewers. Studies were evaluated for relevancy using PICO and whether they reported sensitivity, specificity and Area Under Receivers' Operator Characteristics (AUROC) curve. Pooling of sensitivity of instruments was done using a forest plot. Results: Eleven articles were included in the review. Their methodological quality ranged from adequate to excellent. There were variations in level of accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS), Beck Depression Index, Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, Hopkins Symptoms Checklist-25, Kessler Psychological Distress Scale and Self-Reporting Questionnaire 20. EPDS had highest level of accuracy (AUROC=.965) and sensitivity (1). Conclusion: The review considered instruments for screening depression in antenatal in low resource settings. Articles which reported accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for screening instruments were assessed for methodological quality. This review suggests that EPDS can be a suitable instrument of preference for screening antenatal depression in low resource settings because its level of accuracy ranged from moderate to high in various settings. The EPDS had the high level of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and it was validated by studies which had either good or excellent methodological quality. However, it is crucial that the instrument is validated using methodologically rigorous studies before use in a particular setting.