Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Comparison of EPDS Scores Among Women with Good Neonatal Outcomes and Adverse Neonatal Outcomes

  • Short Commentary
  • Published:
The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A comparative, questionnaire-based study among postpartum patients was conducted using the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale. 80 women who had good neonatal outcomes were compared with 80 women who had adverse neonatal outcomes. Demographic characteristics were similar between the groups. The average EPDS score in those with good neonatal outcomes was lesser than that of those with adverse neonatal outcome (10.07 vs11.04, p 0.045). Using the cut-off value of 9, the proportion of women who tested positive (higher chance of PPD) was statistically significantly higher (p value 0.0488) in adverse neonatal outcomes group (45% vs 28.75%). This result showed that women who have experienced stillbirth/ neonatal mortality or had neonates who needed NICU care have a higher propensity for PPD. This implies that women who have experienced stillbirth/neonatal mortality should be considered for prioritization in screening for PPD. PPD screening, even if not done routinely, should be done in this selected group (adverse perinatal outcomes group) on priority.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Upadhyay RP, Chowdhury R, Salehi Aslyeh, Sarkar K, Singh SK, Sinha B, Pawar A, Rajalakshmi AK, Kumar A. Postpartum depression in India: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Bull World Health Organ. 2017;95(10):706-717C. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.17.192237 (Epub 2017 Sep 5. PMID: 29147043; PMCID: PMC5689195).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Screening for perinatal depression. ACOG Committee Opnion. Available from: https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/committee-opinion/articles/2018/11/screening-for-perinatal-depression

  3. https://www.rcog.org.uk/globalassets/documents/patients/information/maternalmental-healthwomens-voices.pdf

  4. Chhabria A. Postpartum Blues – Coping with Depression. In: Pai RD, Bhalerao S, Balsarkar GD, eds. Postpartum Phase. Our Continued Responsibilty. FOGSI. 2018. Available from : https://www.fogsi.org/wp-content/uploads/fogsi-focus/postpartum-phase.pdf

  5. Ransing R, Kukreti P, Deshpande S, Godake S, Neelam N, Raghuveer P, Mahadevaiah M, Kataria D, Patil S, Puri M, Padma K. Perinatal depression-knowledge gap among service providers and service utilizers in India. Asian J Psychiatr. 2020;47: 101822. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2019.10.002 (Epub 2019 Oct 3 PMID: 31710947).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Zaidi F, Nigam A, Anjum R, Agarwalla R. Postpartum depression in women: a risk factor analysis. J Clin Diagn Res. 2017. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2017/25480.10479 (Epub 2017 Aug 1. PMID: 28969212; PMCID: PMC5620853).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Lancet T. Screening for perinatal depression: a missed opportunity. Lancet. 2016;387(10018):505. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00265-8 (PMID: 26867429).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Madhva Prasad.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Declaration of HELSINKI 1975, as revised in 2008 (5). Institutional Ethics Committee Approval was taken (EC-OA-19/2018).

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants who were included in the study. This is a questionnaire study, and this article does not contain any studies with animal subjects.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Prasad, M., Joshi, A. & Saxena, A. Comparison of EPDS Scores Among Women with Good Neonatal Outcomes and Adverse Neonatal Outcomes. J Obstet Gynecol India 73, 552–554 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-022-01650-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-022-01650-x

Keywords

Navigation