Risk factors for postpartum depression: the role of the Postpartum Depression Predictors Inventory-Revised (PDPI-R)
- 1k Downloads
The aims of this study were to identify the frequency of the risk factors for postpartum depression (PPD) listed in the Postpartum Depression Predictors Inventory-Revised (PDPI-R) during pregnancy and 1 month after delivery and to determine the predictive validity of the PDPI-R. The study used a prospective cohort design. Women completed the PDPI-R at the 3rd and the 8th months of pregnancy and at the 1st month after childbirth. Women were prospectively followed across three different time points during the postpartum using Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Disorders to determine the presence of major or minor depression. The prenatal version of the PDPI-R administered at two different time points during pregnancy predicted accurately 72.6% and 78.2% of PPD and the full version administered at the 1st month after delivery predicted 83.4% of PPD. The cutoffs identified were 3.5 for the prenatal version and 5.5 for the full version. The PDPI-R is a useful and a valid screening tool for PPD.
KeywordsPostpartum depression Risk factors ROC analysis PDPI-R
This research was funded with a grant from the Italian Ministry of Health and liberal grants from IDEA and Stella Major Foundations (no-profit advocacy associations) and Pfizer Italia. The PND-ReScU staff includes Drs. Banti S., Borri C., Rambelli C., Ramacciotti D., Montagnani M., Camilleri V., Cortopassi S., Bettini A., Ricciardulli S., Luisi S., Bruni J., Cianelli E., Mazzoni R., Corradini A., Cirri C., Di Biase S., Montaresi S., Casimo L., Giunti Y., Ciaponi B., and Oppo A. The authors thank Giulia Gray for editing the final version of the paper. We thank all the women who participated without whom this study would not have been possible.
- Boyer D, Van Der Leden M, Bacom C (1990) Prediction of postpartum depressive symptoms in low income Black women. Unpublished manuscriptGoogle Scholar
- Buist AE, Barnett BEW, Milgrom J et al (2002) To screen or not to screen—that is the question in perinatal depression. Med J Aust 177:101–105Google Scholar
- First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M et al (1995) Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV axis I disorders (SCID). New York State Psychiatric Institute, Biometrics Research, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Fletcher RH, Fletcher SW, Wagner EH (1996) Clinical epidemiology: the essentials. Williams & Wilkins, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
- Food and Drug Admistration (1979) Labeling and prescription drug advertising: content and format for labelling for human prescription drugs. Fed Regist 44:37434–37467Google Scholar
- Gaynes, BN, Gavin, N, Meltzer-Brody S et al (2005) Perinatal depression: prevalence, screening accuracy, and screening outcomes. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 119. (Prepared by the RTI-University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center, under Contract No. 290-02-0016.) AHRQ Publication No. 05-E006-2. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and QualityGoogle Scholar
- Shakespeare J (2002) Evaluation of screening for postnatal depression against the NSC handbook criteria. Prepared for a working party, June 2001. <http://www.nelh.nhs.uk/screening/adult_pps/ postnatal_depression.html>. Accessed Jan 2002, Jul 2002.
- Swets JA, Picket RM (1982) Evaluation of diagnostic systems. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar