OBJECTIVES: Although depression screening in obstetrics settings has been recommended, little research exists to guide strategies for screening follow up and depression referral. The purpose of this qualitative study was to inform recommendations for depression screening follow up and referral in obstetrics settings based on responses from a key sample of women about influences on depression treatment use and engagement. METHODS: A stratified purposeful sampling based on pregnancy, socioeconomic status and depression severity was used to identify 23 women who completed semistructured interviews that centered on their beliefs about what would prevent or facilitate entry into depression treatment in the context of obstetrical care. We conducted a thematic analysis through an iterative process of expert transcript review, creation of and refining codes and identifying themes. RESULTS: Two broad themes influencing depression treatment usage emerged including practical and psychological factors. Among practical factors, women reported a strong preference for treatment provided in the obstetric clinic or in the home with a desire for a proactive referral process and flexible options for receiving treatment. Psychological factors included differing conceptualizations of depression, knowledge about severity and treatment and issues of stigma. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the current standard practice of depression screening and referral to specialty treatment does not match with perceived influences on treatment use among our sample of perinatal women. Recommendations derived from the results for improving follow up with screening and depression referral in obstetrics settings are provided as a platform for further research. Published by Elsevier Inc.
OBJECTIVES: Although depression screening in obstetrics settings has been recommended, little research exists to guide strategies for screening follow up and depression referral. The purpose of this qualitative study was to inform recommendations for depression screening follow up and referral in obstetrics settings based on responses from a key sample of women about influences on depression treatment use and engagement. METHODS: A stratified purposeful sampling based on pregnancy, socioeconomic status and depression severity was used to identify 23 women who completed semistructured interviews that centered on their beliefs about what would prevent or facilitate entry into depression treatment in the context of obstetrical care. We conducted a thematic analysis through an iterative process of expert transcript review, creation of and refining codes and identifying themes. RESULTS: Two broad themes influencing depression treatment usage emerged including practical and psychological factors. Among practical factors, women reported a strong preference for treatment provided in the obstetric clinic or in the home with a desire for a proactive referral process and flexible options for receiving treatment. Psychological factors included differing conceptualizations of depression, knowledge about severity and treatment and issues of stigma. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the current standard practice of depression screening and referral to specialty treatment does not match with perceived influences on treatment use among our sample of perinatal women. Recommendations derived from the results for improving follow up with screening and depression referral in obstetrics settings are provided as a platform for further research. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Robin Cook Kopelman; Joy Moel; Carol Mertens; Scott Stuart; Stephan Arndt; Michael W O'Hara Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Barbara P Yawn; Allen J Dietrich; Peter Wollan; Susan Bertram; Debbie Graham; Jessica Huff; Margary Kurland; Suzanne Madison; Wilson D Pace Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2012 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Katy Backes Kozhimannil; Alyce S Adams; Stephen B Soumerai; Alisa B Busch; Haiden A Huskamp Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 6.301
Authors: Sona Dimidjian; Sherryl H Goodman; Nancy E Sherwood; Gregory E Simon; Evette Ludman; Robert Gallop; Stacy Shaw Welch; Jennifer M Boggs; Christina A Metcalf; Sam Hubley; J David Powers; Arne Beck Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2017-01
Authors: Katherine L Wisner; Dorothy K Y Sit; Mary C McShea; David M Rizzo; Rebecca A Zoretich; Carolyn L Hughes; Heather F Eng; James F Luther; Stephen R Wisniewski; Michelle L Costantino; Andrea L Confer; Eydie L Moses-Kolko; Christopher S Famy; Barbara H Hanusa Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 21.596