“…In the present study, gestational age was not significantly associated with the risk of depression during pregnancy, but this was more frequent in the first trimester of pregnancy. This result is similar to the data evidenced in a cohort of 1,000 days (S1000) carried out in Soweto, South Africa (19) and contrasts with a study conducted in Indonesia, where depression was more frequent among pregnant women in the third trimester (20) .…”
Objective: to identify the risk of depression in pregnancy among pregnant women undergoing follow-up in high-risk prenatal care, to assess the factors associated with higher risk of depression in pregnancy and to compare the risk of depression in each gestational trimester. Method: this is a descriptive, correlational, cross-sectional study, conducted with 151 pregnant women in prenatal care in a high-risk pregnancy outpatient clinic at a university hospital in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. Data were collected through an online form. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests were performed. After the bivariate analysis, the variables were included in the logistic regression model. In the final model, the Odds Ratio was calculated. Results: 118 (78.1%) pregnant women had a higher risk of depression during pregnancy, which was higher in the first trimester, but without statistical significance. The number of pregnancies (OR = 0.32) and marital status (OR = 0.07) remained significantly associated with higher risk of depression during pregnancy as protective factors. Conclusion: the results elucidate the importance of screening for depression risk and the significant need to improve access to effective interventions for preventing prenatal depression and promoting mental health.
“…In the present study, gestational age was not significantly associated with the risk of depression during pregnancy, but this was more frequent in the first trimester of pregnancy. This result is similar to the data evidenced in a cohort of 1,000 days (S1000) carried out in Soweto, South Africa (19) and contrasts with a study conducted in Indonesia, where depression was more frequent among pregnant women in the third trimester (20) .…”
Objective: to identify the risk of depression in pregnancy among pregnant women undergoing follow-up in high-risk prenatal care, to assess the factors associated with higher risk of depression in pregnancy and to compare the risk of depression in each gestational trimester. Method: this is a descriptive, correlational, cross-sectional study, conducted with 151 pregnant women in prenatal care in a high-risk pregnancy outpatient clinic at a university hospital in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. Data were collected through an online form. Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests were performed. After the bivariate analysis, the variables were included in the logistic regression model. In the final model, the Odds Ratio was calculated. Results: 118 (78.1%) pregnant women had a higher risk of depression during pregnancy, which was higher in the first trimester, but without statistical significance. The number of pregnancies (OR = 0.32) and marital status (OR = 0.07) remained significantly associated with higher risk of depression during pregnancy as protective factors. Conclusion: the results elucidate the importance of screening for depression risk and the significant need to improve access to effective interventions for preventing prenatal depression and promoting mental health.
“…No presente estudo, a idade gestacional não apresentou associação significativa com risco de depressão na gravidez, porém este foi mais frequente no primeiro trimestre da gravidez. Este resultado se assemelha ao dado evidenciado em uma coorte de mil dias (S1000, realizada em Soweto, África do Sul (19) e contrasta com estudo realizado na Indonésia, onde a depressão foi mais frequente entre gestantes no terceiro trimestre (20) .…”
RESUMO Objetivo: identificar o risco de depressão na gravidez entre gestantes em acompanhamento na assistência pré-natal de alto risco, avaliar os fatores associados ao maior risco de depressão na gravidez e comparar o risco de depressão em cada trimestre gestacional. Método: estudo descritivo, correlacional, transversal, realizado com 151 gestantes em acompanhamento pré-natal em ambulatório de gestação de alto risco de um hospital universitário no estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Os dados foram coletados por um formulário online. Foram realizados os Testes do Qui-Quadrado e Exato de Fisher. Após a análise bivariada, as variáveis foram incluídas no modelo de regressão logística. No modelo final, foi calcula a Razão de Chances. Resultados: 118 (78,1%) gestantes apresentaram maior risco de depressão na gravidez, o qual foi maior no primeiro trimestre, mas sem significância estatística. O número de gestações (OR = 0,32) e o estado civil (OR = 0,07) permaneceram associados significativamente ao maior risco de depressão na gravidez como fatores de proteção. Conclusão: os resultados elucidam a importância do rastreamento do risco de depressão e a necessidade significativa de melhorar o acesso a intervenções eficazes para prevenção da depressão pré-natal e promoção da sua saúde mental.
“…Globally, the prevalence of anxiety disorders and depression in pregnant women is high in low-and middle-income countries, ranging from 1% to 37% [1], [2]. Pregnant women are estimated to experience anxiety disorders by 47.3% and depression by 59.7% in two regions of Indonesia (Yogyakarta and DKI Jakarta) [3], [4]. This can be an obstacle to improving maternal health and reducing a third of premature deaths related to mental health in the sustainable development goals (SDGs) targets in low-and middle-income countries, especially Indonesia [5].…”
BACKGROUND: Anxiety and depression disorders in pregnant women are often not identified so that early treatment is not optimal. Indonesia already has comprehensive integrated antenatal care, including services for pregnant women with mental disorders, but until now Indonesia does not yet have a standardized instrument that is valid and suitable as a screening tool to assess symptoms of anxiety and depression in pregnant women. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is a screening instrument with high sensitivity and specificity, has been translated into Indonesian, but until now, the Indonesian version of the EPDS instrument has not been evaluated for validity and reliability in the population of pregnant women.
AIM: this study aimed to adapt the Indonesian version of the EPDS instrument, including testing the validity and reliability of the instrument when used on pregnant women in Indonesia.
METHODS: This research is a cross sectional study. The number of pregnant women who participated were 125 samples. Data were collected randomly, and the assessment of symptoms of anxiety and depression was self-reported via online. Content validity was assessed with a content validity index from 5 experts, construct validation was analyzed by Explanatory Factor Analysis and Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Convergent Validity. The reliability of the EPDS instrument was assessed by construct reliability and Cronbach's Alpha.
RESULTS: Content validity index shows expert agreement with a value of .98. The Indonesian version of the EPDS shows assessing three factors, namely: Depression (5 items), Anxiety (3 items), and Anhedonia (2 items). The reliability of the Indonesian version of the EPDS instrument is good with Cronbach's Alpha .80 and the internal reliability of the 10 items (Cronbach's Alpha .767-.812).
CONCLUSION: The Indonesian version of the EPDS instrument is valid and reliable to be used to assess symptoms of anxiety and depression in pregnant women in antenatal care in Indonesia.
Keywords: pregnant women, EPDS, validity, reliability
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.