| Literature DB >> 35953774 |
Genesis Chorwe-Sungani1, Modesta Mwagomba2, Ellen Chirwa3, Diana Jere4, Jennifer Chipps5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Depression is one of the most common perinatal mental health problems that affect pregnant women. Antenatal depression can adversely affect the well-being of the pregnant woman and her foetus. Depression is rarely detected by midwives due to the unavailability of relevant screening instruments in Malawi. A Screening Protocol for Antenatal Depression (SPADe) was developed and recommended for possible use to screen for depression in antenatal clinics in the country. The acceptability and feasibility of using the SPADe protocol to screen for depression has not been established. The aim of this study was to assess the acceptability and feasibility of screening for depression by midwives using SPADe in antenatal clinics in Blantyre district.Entities:
Keywords: Acceptability; Antenatal depression; Feasibility; Midwives; SPADe; Screening
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35953774 PMCID: PMC9371629 DOI: 10.1186/s12888-022-04195-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Psychiatry ISSN: 1471-244X Impact factor: 4.144
Demographic characteristics
| Item | Mean | sd | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 33.9 | 8.4 | |
| Work experience | 8.2 | 7.3 | |
| Health centre | |||
| Ndirande | 26(43.3) | ||
| Chileka | 19(31.7) | ||
| Mpemba | 15(25) | ||
| Gender | |||
| Female | 55(91.7) | ||
| Male | 5(8.3) | ||
| Cadre | |||
| Nurse Midwife Technician | 43(71.7) | ||
| Community Midwife | 8(13.3) | ||
| Registered Nurse Midwife | 7(11.7) | ||
| Enrolled Nurse Midwife | 2(3.3) | ||
| Highest qualification | |||
| Diploma | 39(65) | ||
| Certificate | 12(20) | ||
| Degree | 9(15) | ||
| Marital status | |||
| Married | 37(61.7) | ||
| Not married | 23(38.3) | ||
Respondents’ scores of enablers of SPADE based on SAFE
| Item | Scores | |
|---|---|---|
| Will be applicable to population of interest (e.g. pregnant women using antenatal clinics) | 3.9 | 0.4* |
| The intended goals of the SPADe match the prioritised goals of the Ministry of Health | 3.9 | 0.5* |
| Is likely to be effective (e.g. evidence based and expected to produce positive outcomes) | 3.8 | 0.6* |
| Is flexible (e.g. can it be tailored to the context and situation) | 3.7 | 0.6* |
| Can be piloted | 3.5 | 1,0* |
| Is manualised | 3.5 | 1.0* |
| Will be cost saving | 3.2 | 1.0* |
| Is reversible | 3.1 | 1.2* |
* = Enabler at cutoff ≥ 3
Respondents’ scores of barriers of SPADe based on SAFE
| Item | Scores | |
|---|---|---|
| Staff will require specific training to deliver the?? SPADe | 3.7 | 0.7* |
| Will require ongoing support and supervision | 3.5 | 0.8* |
| Will require additional material resources | 3.0 | 0.9* |
| Will require additional human resources | 2.8 | 1.0 |
| Is complex | 2.6 | 0.9 |
| Will be time consuming to implement | 2.8 | 0.8 |
| Will be costly | 2.3 | 0.7 |
| There are known serious or adverse events associated with the SPADe | 2.2 | 0.7 |
* = Barrier at cutoff ≥ 3
Respondents’ mean scores of acceptability on OADRI
| Item | Scores | |
|---|---|---|
| SPADe will be useful in my practice | 5.4 | 0.8 |
| Clients will benefit from use of SPADe | 5.3 | 1 |
| Wording of SPADe is clear and unambiguous | 5.1 | 1 |
| SPADe will be easy to use | 5 | 1 |
| SPADe will be easy to remember | 4.9 | 1.1 |
| Environment I work in will not make it difficult to use SPADe | 4.8 | 1.4 |
| My colleagues will support use of SPADe | 4.7 | 1 |
| SPADe will result in improved use of resources | 4.6 | 1.3 |
| SPADe will account for important clinical cue?? | 4.4 | 1.4 |
| I am already using another protocol or similar strategy | 4.2 | 1.6 |
| Evidence supporting SPADe is not flawed | 3.6 | 1.2 |
| SPADe will not increase the chance of lawsuits | 3.2 | 1.3 |
| Overall summary Score | 4.6 | 0.6 |
Respondents mean scores on acceptability of screening for depression inrelation to their demographic characteristics
| Demographic characteristics | Scores | Statistic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | sd | ||
| Health Centre | 0.2, .922 | ||
| Mpemba | 4.7 | 0.7 | |
| Ndirande | 4.7 | 0.7 | |
| Chileka | 4.4 | 0.5 | |
| Age | 0.4, .554 | ||
| ≤ 32 years | 4.6 | 0.5 | |
| ≥ 33 years | 4.5 | 0.8 | |
| Gender | 0.3, .592 | ||
| Male | 4.9 | 0.6 | |
| Female | 4.6 | 0.6 | |
| Cadre | 1.2, .741 | ||
| Nurse Midwife Technician | 4.7 | 0.7 | |
| Registered Nurse Midwife | 4.7 | 0.3 | |
| Enrolled Nurse Midwife | 4.4 | 0.9 | |
| Community Midwife | 4.3 | 0.3 | |
| Highest qualification | 0.8, .860 | ||
| Certicicate | 4.3 | 0.6 | |
| Diploma | 4.6 | 0.6 | |
| Degree | 4.9 | 0.6 | |
| Marital status | 1.9, .161 | ||
| Married | 4.6 | 0.7 | |
| Not married | 4.7 | 0.5 | |
| Work experience | 0.4, .554 | ||
| ≥ 7 years | 4.7 | 0.8 | |
| ≤ 6 years | 4.5 | 0.4 |