Screening for postnatal depression in primary care: cost effectiveness analysis

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the cost effectiveness of routine screening for postnatal depression in primary care. Design Cost effectiveness analysis with a decision model of alternative methods of screening for depression, including standardised postnatal depression and generic depression instruments. The performance of screening instruments was derived from a systematic review and bivariate meta-analysis at a range of instrument cut points; estimates of other relevant parameters were derived from literature sources and relevant databases. A decision tree considered the full treatment pathway from the possible onset of postnatal depression through identification, treatment, and possible relapse. Setting Primary care. Participants A hypothetical population of women assessed for postnatal depression either via routine care only or supplemented by use of formal identification methods six weeks postnatally, as recommended in recent guidelines. Main outcome measures Costs expressed in 2006-7 prices and impact on health outcomes expressed in terms of quality adjusted life years (QALYs). The time horizon of the analysis was one year. Results The routine application of either postnatal or general depression questionnaires did not seem to be cost effective compared with routine care only. The Edinburgh postnatal depression scale (at a cut point of 16) had an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £41 103 (€45 398, $67 130) per QALY compared with routine care only. The ICER for all other strategies ranged from £49 928 to £272 463 per QALY versus routine care only, while the probability that no formal identification strategy was cost effective was 88% (59%) at a cost effectiveness threshold of £20 000 (£30 000) per QALY. While sensitivity analysis indicated that the cost of managing incorrectly identified depression (false positive result) was an important driver of the model, formal identification approaches did not seem to be cost effective at any feasible estimate of this cost. Conclusions Formal identification methods for postnatal depression do not seem to represent value for money for the NHS. The major determinant of cost effectiveness seems to be the potential additional costs of managing women incorrectly diagnosed as depressed. Formal identification methods for postnatal depression do not currently satisfy the National Screening Committee's criteria for the adoption of a screening strategy as part of national health policy. INTRODUCTIONDepression accounts for the greatest burden among all mental health problems and by 2020 is expected to become the second most common general health problem.1 Postnatal depression is an important category of depression, with over 11% of women experiencing major or minor postnatal depression six weeks postnatally.2 There is now considerable evidence to show that postnatal depression has a substantial impact on the mother and her partner, 3 the family, 4 motherbaby interactions, 5 and the longer term emotional and cognitive development of the baby, 6 especially when depress...

Suicide ideation, depression and HIV among pregnant women in rural South Africa

“…Efforts are hampered by shortages of health care professionals [55][56][57], overburdened clinics [58] and a lack of training and support for lay counsellors and community health care workers who work in time-pressured, task-heavy, roles where compassion fatigue and burnout is commonplace [58][59][60]. Since universal screening is seldom costeffective in the absence of access to treatment [61], significant policy and public health investments are required to make suicide prevention and intervention feasible for pregnant women in these settings. A lack of health care provider awareness and training has also been shown to account for much inequity in access to treatment for depression [62].…”

A proposal for a new Brazilian six-item version of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale

“…Nevertheless, it is important to emphasize that the 10-item version has proved prone to an elevated falsepositive rate (=25%), 5 which could also be a limitation of our new 6-item version. However, we argue that a shorter scale reduces application time and costs and should therefore help to address the current situation of under diagnosis, which is mainly observed in undeveloped countries where health services may not be structured.…”

“…5 This has motivated studies of the EPDS' factor structure and prompted the suggestion that a shorter EPDS depression subscale could provide a better predictive scale for depression than the entire EPDS. 6 From a public health perspective, this could reduce costs by avoiding unnecessary referrals to psychiatrists for a screening tool.…”

When should women be screened for postnatal depression?

“…A recent meta-ana lysis found that requiring these questions to be endorsed caused substantial numbers of depressed patients to be missed [20], raising concern that their use may not be helpful in the detection of postpartum depression [21]. Paulden and colleagues evaluated the cost-effectiveness of screening interventions for postnatal depression in primary care [22]. Alternative methods of screening at 6 weeks postpartum informed a cost-effectiveness decision model, outcomes of which showed that formal identification methods were not cost effective when compared with routine care because of the high number of false positives likely to be detected, although the authors acknowledged the lack of data on the use of Whooley questions in the perinatal period.…”