Objective: Data are scarce regarding the sociodemographic predictors of antenatal and postpartum depression. This study investigated whether race/ethnicity, age, finances, and partnership status were associated with antenatal and postpartum depressive symptoms. Setting: 1662 participants in Project Viva, a US cohort study. Design: Mothers indicated mid-pregnancy and six month postpartum depressive symptoms on the Edinburgh postpartum depression scale (EPDS). Associations of sociodemographic factors with odds of scoring .12 on the EPDS were estimated. Main results: The prevalence of depressive symptoms was 9% at mid-pregnancy and 8% postpartum. Black and Hispanic mothers had a higher prevalence of depressive symptoms compared with nonHispanic white mothers. These associations were explained by lower income, financial hardship, and higher incidence of poor pregnancy outcome among minority women. Young maternal age was associated with greater risk of antenatal and postpartum depressive symptoms, largely attributable to the prevalence of financial hardship, unwanted pregnancy, and lack of a partner. The strongest risk factor for antenatal depressive symptoms was a history of depression (OR = 4.07; 95% CI 3.76, 4.40), and the strongest risk for postpartum depressive symptoms was depressive symptoms during pregnancy (6.78; 4.07, 11.31) or a history of depression before pregnancy (3.82; 2.31, 6.31). Conclusions: Financial hardship and unwanted pregnancy are associated with antenatal and postpartum depressive symptoms. Women with a history of depression and those with poor pregnancy outcomes are especially vulnerable to depressive symptoms during the childbearing year. Once these factors are taken in account, minority mothers have the same risk of antenatal and postpartum depressive symptoms as white mothers.

No abstract

In addition to helping employees with depression obtain high-quality depression treatment, new interventions may be needed to help them to overcome the substantial job upheaval that this population experiences.

No abstract

Context.-The effectiveness of recruiting local medical opinion leaders to improve quality of care is poorly understood.Objective.-To evaluate a guideline-implementation intervention of clinician education by local opinion leaders and performance feedback to (1) increase use of lifesaving drugs (aspirin and thrombolytics in eligible elderly patients, ␤-blockers in all eligible patients) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and (2) decrease use of a potentially harmful therapy (prophylactic lidocaine).Design.-Randomized controlled trial with hospital as the unit of randomization, intervention, and analysis.Setting.-Thirty-seven community hospitals in Minnesota.Patients.-All patients with AMI admitted to study hospitals over 10 months before (1992-1993, N=2409) or after (1995-1996, N=2938) the intervention.Intervention.-Using a validated survey, we identified opinion leaders at 20 experimental hospitals who influenced peers through small and large group discussions, informal consultations, and revisions of protocols and clinical pathways. They focused on (1) evidence (drug efficacy), (2) comparative performance, and (3) barriers to change. Control hospitals received mailed performance feedback.Main Outcome Measures.-Hospital-specific changes before and after the intervention in the proportion of eligible patients receiving each study drug.Results.-Among experimental hospitals, the median change in the proportion of eligible elderly patients receiving aspirin was +0.13 (17% increase from 0.77 at baseline), compared with a change of −0.03 at control hospitals (P=.04). For ␤-blockers, the respective changes were +0.31 (63% increase from 0.49 at baseline) vs +0.18 (30% increase from baseline) for controls (P=.02). Lidocaine use declined by about 50% in both groups. The intervention did not increase thrombolysis in the elderly (from 0.73 at baseline), but nearly two thirds of eligible nonrecipients were older than 85 years, had severe comorbidities, or presented after at least 6 hours.Conclusions.-Working with opinion leaders and providing performance feedback can accelerate adoption of some beneficial AMI therapies (eg, aspirin, ␤-blockers). Secular changes in knowledge and hospital protocols may extinguish outdated practices (eg, prophylactic lidocaine). However, it is more difficult to increase use of effective but riskier treatments (eg, thrombolysis) for frail elderly patients.