Oquendo CM, Lartigue BT, González-Pacheco I, Méndez CS

Language: Spanish
References: 15
Page: 195-202
PDF size: 169.04 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To determine the validity and security of Perinatal Depression Edinburgh Scale, like screening test to identify perinatal depression in patients who went to the external consultation of the Instituto Nacional de Perinatologia with pregnancy between 24 and 34 weeks.
Material and methods: A cross-sectional study was made in the INPerIER between January and December 2006 with 209 women undergoing 24 and 34 weeks of pregnancy to those it was applied to them the Perinatal Depression Edinburgh Scale settled down as cut point a qualification 14 to group like positive cases (equal or more than 14) and negatives (less than 14). Like gold standard, both groups were evaluated in the Departmento de Investigacion Psicosocial of the INPerIER with Clinical Interview Structured for the Upheavals of Axis I of the DSM-IV and the Interview the International Composed of Diagnostic (CIDI), of the Worldwide Health Organization to establish or to discard depression diagnosis.
Results: From the 209 patients, according to the results obtained by the screening test, 97 (46%) were positive and 112 (54%) were negative. Taking into account the gold standard, were 75 true positives (36%), 22 false positives (10%), 106 true negatives (50%) and six false negatives (4%). Using a table of 2 x 2 one determined that Perinatal Depression Edinburgh Scale, it has a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 82% and predictive values positive of 77% and negative of 94%.
Conclusions: According to the data collected in the present study, Perinatal Depression Edinburgh Scale is a valid and safe instrument to detect perinatal depression.

REFERENCES

1. Ortega L, Lartigue T, Figueroa ME. Prevalencia de la depresión, a través de la Escala de Depresión Perinatal de Edinburgh (EPDS), en una muestra de mujeres mexicanas embarazadas. Perinatol Reprod Hum 2001; 15(1): 11-20.

2. Riecher-Rössler A, Hofecker Fallahpour M. Postpartum depression: do we still need this diagnostic term? Acta Psychiatr Scand 2003; 108(Suppl. 418): 51-6.

3. Gaynes BN, Gavin N, Meltzer-Brody S, Lohr KN, Swinson T, Gartlehner G, Brody S, Miller WC. Evidence Report/Techno-logy Assessment: Number 119. Perinatal Depression: Prevalence, Screening Accuracy, and Screening Outcomes. February, 2005.

4. Lartigue T, González I, Vázquez M, Schnaas L, Ibarra P. Flores Q, et al. La depresión materna. Su efecto en las interacciones madre-hijo en el primer año de vida. Proyecto de investigación entregado en la Dirección de Investigación del INPer; 2003.

5. Espíndola JG, Morales F, Mota C, Díaz E, Meza P, Rodríguez L. Calibración del punto de corte para la Escala de Depresión Perinatal de Edinburgh, en pacientes obstétricas del Instituto Nacional de Perinatología. Perinatol Reprod Hum 2004; 18(3): 179-86.

6. Thoppil J, Riutcel T, Nalesnik S. Early Intervention for Perinatal Depression. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 192(5): 1446-8.

7. Lartigue T, Casanova G, Ortiz J, Aranda C. Indicadores de malestar emocional y depresión en mujeres embarazadas con ITSVIH/SIDA. Perinatol Reprod Hum 2004; 18(2): 73-90.

8. American Psychiatric Association. Manual Diagnóstico y Estadístico de Desórdenes Mentales. 4ta. Ed.; 1994.

9. Tapia RC. Metodología epidemiológica. Ed. Intersistemas. 2004; I(1): 1-57.

10. Hernández RS, Fernández CC, Baptista PL. Metodología de la investigación. 3a Ed. McGraw-Hill; 2004, p. 113-30.

11. Fernández P, Pértegas SD. Pruebas diagnósticas. Cad Aten Primaria 2003; 10: 120-4.

12. Molinero LM. Valoración de pruebas diagnósticas. ASEH. Disponible en: www.seh-lelha.org/stat1.htm. [Consultado en octubre 2002].

13. Benson RC. Diagnóstico y tratamiento ginecoobstétricos. Aspectos psicológicos de la Obstetricia y Ginecología; 1984, p. 1055-9.

14. Campbell SB, Cohn JF. Prevalence and correlates of postpartum depression in firsttime mothers. J Abon Psychol 1991; 100(4): 594-9.

15. Smallwood S, Jamieson D, Lindsay M. Diagnosing postpartum depression: Can we do better? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2002; 186: 899-902.