A narrative review of studies addressing the clinical effectiveness of perinatal depression screening programs

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Reilly ◽  
Dawn Kingston ◽  
Deborah Loxton ◽  
Kristina Talcevska ◽  
Marie-Paule Austin
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly M. Long ◽  
Robert J. Cramer ◽  
Linda Bennington ◽  
Frank G. Morgan ◽  
Charles A. Wilkes ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 107 (2, Part 1) ◽  
pp. 342-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trent E. J. Gordon ◽  
Ida A. Cardone ◽  
Jennifer J. Kim ◽  
Scott M. Gordon ◽  
Richard K. Silver

Author(s):  
WQ Xue ◽  
KK Cheng ◽  
D Xu ◽  
X Jin ◽  
WJ Gong

Abstract Aims Perinatal depression threatens the health of maternal women and their offspring. Although screening programs for perinatal depression exist, non-uptake of referral to further mental health care after screening reduces the utility of these programs. Uptake rates among women with positive screening varied widely across studies and little is known about how to improve the uptake rate. This study aimed to systematically review the available evidence on uptake rates, estimate the pooled rate, identify interventions to improve uptake of referral and explore the effectiveness of those interventions. Methods This systematic review has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42019138095). We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Ovid, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang Database and VIP Databases from database inception to January 13, 2019 and scanned reference lists of relevant researches for studies published in English or Chinese. Studies providing information on uptake rate and/or effectiveness of interventions on uptake of referral were eligible for inclusion. Studies were excluded if they did not report the details of the referral process or did not provide exact uptake rate. Data provided by observational studies and quasi-experimental studies were used to estimate the pooled uptake rate through meta-analysis. We also performed meta-regression and subgroup analyses to explore the potential source of heterogeneity. To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, we conducted descriptive analyses instead of meta-analyses since there was only one randomised controlled trial (RCT). Results Of 2302 records identified, 41 studies were eligible for inclusion, including 39 observational studies (n = 9337), one quasi-experimental study (n = 43) and one RCT (n = 555). All but two studies were conducted in high-income countries. The uptake rates reported by included studies varied widely and the pooled uptake rate of referral was 43% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 35–50%) by a random-effect model. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses both showed that referral to on-site assessment or treatment (60%, 95% CI 51–69%) had a significantly higher uptake rate than referral to mental health service (32%, 95% CI 23–41%) (odds ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.13–1.52). The included RCT showed that the referral intervention significantly improved the uptake rate (p < 0.01). Conclusions Almost three-fifths of women with positive screening results do not take up the referral offers after perinatal depression screening. Referral to on-site assessment and treatment may improve uptake of referral, but the quality of evidence on interventions to increase uptake was weak. More robust studies are needed, especially in low-and middle-income countries.


2015 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 305-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen M. Tabb ◽  
Shinwoo Choi ◽  
Maria Pineros-Leano ◽  
Brandon Meline ◽  
Hellen G. McDonald ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 123 ◽  
pp. 60S ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Jo Kim ◽  
Richard K. Silver ◽  
Laura M. La Porte ◽  
Ying Zhou ◽  
Samantha B. Allweiss ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 292-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul B Jacobsen ◽  
Wynne E Norton

Abstract Despite considerable evidence that psychosocial interventions can effectively relieve distress in patients with cancer, many individuals who could benefit from these interventions do not receive them. A proposed solution to this problem is the establishment of programs in oncology settings that routinely screen for distress and refer patients for appropriate psychosocial care. This commentary addresses a review by Ehlers et al. that describes policies and procedures related to distress screening, summarizes prior research on this topic, and identifies key areas for future research. Among their major conclusions is the need for research to fill the gap in knowledge about how best to implement new distress screening programs as well as optimize the use and efficiency of existing programs. This commentary focuses on how the types of study methods, designs, and outcomes that are commonplace in implementation science to facilitate the integration of research into practice can be applied to distress screening programs. Priorities identified include designing and conducting pragmatic clinical trials, evaluating multilevel interventions, and using hybrid designs to simultaneously evaluate clinical effectiveness and barriers and facilitators of implementation. Use of these approaches holds considerable potential for developing an evidence base that can promote more widespread adoption of effective distress screening programs and inform further development of standards and policies related to the psychosocial care of patients with cancer.


2010 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 814-821 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa S. Segre ◽  
Rebecca L. Brock ◽  
Michael W. O’Hara ◽  
Laura L. Gorman ◽  
Jane Engeldinger

Author(s):  
Ana Telma Pereira ◽  
Mariana Marques ◽  
Cristiana Marques ◽  
Elisabete Bento ◽  
Julieta Azevedo ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 188 ◽  
pp. 284-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarira El-Den ◽  
Claire L. O'Reilly ◽  
Timothy F. Chen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document