Alfonso Gutierrez-Zotes1, David Gallardo-Pujol2, Javier Labad3, Rocío Martín-Santos4, Luisa García-Esteve5, Estel Gelabert6, Manuel Jover7, Roser Guillamat8, Fermín Mayoral9, Isolde Gornemann9, Francesca Canellas10, Mónica Gratacós11, Miriam Guitart3, Miguel Roca12, Javier Costas13, Jose Luis Ivorra7, Ricard Navinés4, Yolanda de Diego14, Elisabet Vilella1, Julio Sanjuan7. 1. Hospital Universitari Institut Pere Mata, IISPV, Universitat Rovira i Virgili. CIBERSAM. Reus, España. 2. Facultat de Psicología, Universitat de Barcelona, Instituto de Neurociencias, Universidad de Barcelona. 3. Departmento de Salud Mental, Parc Taulí Hospital Universitario, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Parc Taulí (I3PT), Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona. CIBERSAM. Sabadell, España. 4. Departamento de Psiquiatría, Instituto de Neurociencias, Hospital Clinic, IDIBAPS, CIBERSAM y Departamento de Psiquiatría y Psicobiología Clínica, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, España Programa de Neurociencias, IMIM-Parc de Salut Mar, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, RTA, Barcelona, España. 5. Departamento de Psiquiatría, Instituto de Neurociencias, Hospital Clinic, IDIBAPS, CIBERSAM y Departamento de Psiquiatría y Psicobiología Clínica, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, España. 6. Programa de Neurociencias, IMIM-Parc de Salut Mar, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, RTA, Barcelona, España Departamento de Psicología Clínica y de la Salud, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, España. 7. Hospital Clinic, Universidad de Valencia, CIBERSAM, Valencia, España. 8. Consorcio Sanitario de Tarrasa, Barcelona, España. 9. UGC Salud Mental. Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, España. 10. Hospital de Son Dureta, Palma de Mallorca, España. 11. Centro de Regulación Genómica (CRG) y UPF, Barcelona, España, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Barcelona, España. 12. Institut Universitari d'Investigació en Ciències de la Salut, RediAPP, Palma de Mallorca, España. 13. Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela (IDIS) Servizo Galego de Saúde (SERGAS), Complexo Hospitalario Universitario de Santiago (CHUS). España. 14. Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga (IBIMA). Hospital Universitario Regional de Malaga. UGC Salud Mental, España.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is considered the gold standard in screening for postpartum depression. Although the Spanish version has been widely used, its factorial structure has not yet been studied . METHODS: A total of 1,204 women completed the EPDS 32 weeks after delivery. To avoid multiple testing, we split the sample into two halves, randomly drawing two subsamples of 602 participants each. We conducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA), followed by an oblimin rotation with the first sub-sample. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using a Weighted Least Squares Means and Variance (WLSMV) estimation of the data. We explored different solutions between two and four factors. We compared the factors between two groups with depression and non-depression (evaluated with the Diagnostic Interview for Genetic Studies (DIGS) for the DSM-IV). RESULTS: The EFA indicated a three-factor model consisting of anxiety, depression and anhedonia. The results of the CFA confirmed the three-factor model (χ2=99.203, p<0.001; RMSEA=0.06, 90% CI=0.04/0.07, CFI=0.87 and TLI=0.82). Women with depression in the first 32 weeks obtained higher scores for anxiety, depression and anhedonia dimensions (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study of confirmatory analysis with the Spanish version of EPDS in a large sample of women without psychiatric care during pregnancy. A three-factor model consisting of anxiety, depression and anhedonia was used. Women with depression had a higher score in the three dimensions of the EPDS.
INTRODUCTION: The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is considered the gold standard in screening for postpartum depression. Although the Spanish version has been widely used, its factorial structure has not yet been studied . METHODS: A total of 1,204 women completed the EPDS 32 weeks after delivery. To avoid multiple testing, we split the sample into two halves, randomly drawing two subsamples of 602 participants each. We conducted exploratory factor analysis (EFA), followed by an oblimin rotation with the first sub-sample. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted using a Weighted Least Squares Means and Variance (WLSMV) estimation of the data. We explored different solutions between two and four factors. We compared the factors between two groups with depression and non-depression (evaluated with the Diagnostic Interview for Genetic Studies (DIGS) for the DSM-IV). RESULTS: The EFA indicated a three-factor model consisting of anxiety, depression and anhedonia. The results of the CFA confirmed the three-factor model (χ2=99.203, p<0.001; RMSEA=0.06, 90% CI=0.04/0.07, CFI=0.87 and TLI=0.82). Women with depression in the first 32 weeks obtained higher scores for anxiety, depression and anhedonia dimensions (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study of confirmatory analysis with the Spanish version of EPDS in a large sample of women without psychiatric care during pregnancy. A three-factor model consisting of anxiety, depression and anhedonia was used. Women with depression had a higher score in the three dimensions of the EPDS.