Marcy Hanson, Tracy Hellem, Julie Alexander-Ruff, Sophia R. Newcomer
{"title":"Systematic Review of Barriers to and Facilitators of Screening for Postpartum Depression at Well-Child Visits in the United States","authors":"Marcy Hanson, Tracy Hellem, Julie Alexander-Ruff, Sophia R. Newcomer","doi":"10.1016/j.nwh.2023.11.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To identify and evaluate barriers to and facilitators of screening for postpartum depression (PPD) during well-child visits in the United States. Additionally, to describe prior work on PPD screening tool evaluation and outcomes from PPD screenings conducted within the well-child setting.</p></div><div><h3>Data Sources</h3><p>A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Five databases (Pub Med, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library) were searched.</p></div><div><h3>Study Selection</h3><p>Randomized controlled trials, case studies, cross-sectional studies, case–control studies, cohort studies, qualitative studies, and quasi-experimental studies conducted in the United States were included. The Standard Quality Assessment Criteria Tool (QualSyst) was used to assess the methodologic quality of each included study.</p></div><div><h3>Data Extraction</h3><p>Sample, setting, methods, screening tools used, location of study setting, intervention, and salient findings were extracted and summarized for further analysis and synthesis.</p></div><div><h3>Data Synthesis</h3><p>Quantitative studies were rated on 14 aspects, and qualitative studies were rated on 10 aspects, per QualSyst. Studies received a score of 2, 1, 0, or not applicable based on scoring criteria, with higher scores indicating greater methodologic quality.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>We found that barriers to PPD screening included concerns regarding time for screening, adequate training, and limited ability for referral. Facilitators of PPD screening included electronic prompts for providers, as well as tool availability and familiarity. Our results indicate that education and training about PPD screening in the pediatric setting are important next steps in addressing the rising concern of PPD in the United States.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":39985,"journal":{"name":"Nursing for Women''s Health","volume":"28 3","pages":"Pages 213-221"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing for Women''s Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751485124000412","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
To identify and evaluate barriers to and facilitators of screening for postpartum depression (PPD) during well-child visits in the United States. Additionally, to describe prior work on PPD screening tool evaluation and outcomes from PPD screenings conducted within the well-child setting.
Data Sources
A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Five databases (Pub Med, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library) were searched.
Study Selection
Randomized controlled trials, case studies, cross-sectional studies, case–control studies, cohort studies, qualitative studies, and quasi-experimental studies conducted in the United States were included. The Standard Quality Assessment Criteria Tool (QualSyst) was used to assess the methodologic quality of each included study.
Data Extraction
Sample, setting, methods, screening tools used, location of study setting, intervention, and salient findings were extracted and summarized for further analysis and synthesis.
Data Synthesis
Quantitative studies were rated on 14 aspects, and qualitative studies were rated on 10 aspects, per QualSyst. Studies received a score of 2, 1, 0, or not applicable based on scoring criteria, with higher scores indicating greater methodologic quality.
Conclusion
We found that barriers to PPD screening included concerns regarding time for screening, adequate training, and limited ability for referral. Facilitators of PPD screening included electronic prompts for providers, as well as tool availability and familiarity. Our results indicate that education and training about PPD screening in the pediatric setting are important next steps in addressing the rising concern of PPD in the United States.
美国产后抑郁症筛查的障碍和促进因素系统回顾》(Systematic Review of Barriers to and Facilitators of Screening for Postpartum Depression at Well-Child Visits in the United States)。
目的:确定并评估在美国儿童健康检查中筛查产后抑郁症(PPD)的障碍和促进因素。此外,还将介绍此前有关产后抑郁筛查工具评估的工作,以及在健康儿童环境中进行产后抑郁筛查的结果:根据《系统综述和元分析首选报告项目》(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses,PRISMA)指南进行了系统综述。检索了五个数据库(Pub Med、PsycINFO、Web of Science、CINAHL 和 Cochrane Library):纳入了在美国进行的随机对照试验、病例研究、横断面研究、病例对照研究、队列研究、定性研究和准实验研究。标准质量评估标准工具(QualSyst)用于评估每项纳入研究的方法学质量:数据提取:提取样本、研究环境、方法、使用的筛选工具、研究环境地点、干预措施以及突出的研究结果,并进行总结,以便进一步分析和综合:根据 QualSyst,定量研究从 14 个方面进行评分,定性研究从 10 个方面进行评分。根据评分标准,研究分为 2 分、1 分、0 分或不适用,分数越高,表明方法学质量越高:我们发现,PPD 筛查的障碍包括对筛查时间、充分培训和转诊能力有限的担忧。促进 PPD 筛查的因素包括提供者的电子提示以及工具的可用性和熟悉程度。我们的研究结果表明,在儿科环境中开展有关 PPD 筛查的教育和培训是解决美国日益严重的 PPD 问题的下一个重要步骤。
期刊介绍:
Nursing for Women"s Health publishes the most recent and compelling health care information on women"s health, newborn care and professional nursing issues. As a refereed, clinical practice journal, it provides professionals involved in providing optimum nursing care for women and their newborns with health care trends and everyday issues in a concise, practical, and easy-to-read format.