Screening for perinatal depression and predictors of underscreening: findings of the Born in Queensland study
Authors: Julia V Marley, Emma Carlin and Catherine Engelke
Published online: 19 August 2019
To the Editor: We agree with San Martin Porter and colleagues1 about the importance of mental health screening during pregnancy and acknowledge the role of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in screening in Australia and internationally. In the article, the authors stressed that the EPDS has been validated. However, the high heterogeneity demonstrated during these validation studies suggests that it is not equally valid across all populations and settings.2 The authors also suggested that low uptake of screening with Aboriginal women is related to less frequent attendance to antenatal checks. This interpretation fails to consider broader cultural safety issues surrounding antenatal care, and more specifically, the language and cultural appropriateness of the EPDS.3 This tool has not been validated with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women. Many Aboriginal women find the EPDS language complex and confusing, and providers find using it with Aboriginal women challenging.3 Screening processes need to be acceptable to patients and staff, and seen to be easy to use and helpful, or they are unlikely to be well implemented. The need to consider the language and cultural appropriateness of the tool used was acknowledged in the latest Clinical practice guidelines: pregnancy care.4
The Kimberley Mum's Mood Scale (KMMS) is a locally designed approach to screening Aboriginal women.3 Part 1 is an adaption of the EPDS. Part 2 is a “yarn” between health professionals and women about contextual or psychosocial factors that are important to the women. Health professionals work with women to identify how they are coping (strengths focus) without minimising risk factors. Validation of the KMMS demonstrated clinical efficacy and high levels of user acceptability.5 Women identified that “just yarning” was a positive start to understanding and managing their perinatal mental health. An approach such as the KMMS, which values listening (health professional) and talking (woman), is a positive, contemporary and logical next step from the EPDS. We suggest that all women, Aboriginal and non‐Aboriginal, would benefit from this approach. Traditional screening practices are not enough, but the next generation of screening tools provides new opportunities for women and their health professionals.
Competing interests
No relevant disclosures.
References
- San Martin Porter MA, Betts K, Kisely S, et al. Screening for perinatal depression and predictors of underscreening: findings of the Born in Queensland study. Med J Aust 2019; 210: 32–37. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2019/210/1/screening-perinatal-depression-and-predictors-underscreening-findings-born
- Gibson J, McKenzie‐McHarg K, Shakespeare J, et al. A systematic review of studies validating the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale in antepartum and postpartum women. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2009; 119: 350–364.
- Kotz J, Munns A, Marriott R, et al. Perinatal depression and screening among Aboriginal Australians in the Kimberley. Contemp Nurse 2016; 52: 42–58.
- Department of Health. Clinical practice guidelines: pregnancy care. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2018. https://www.clinicalguidelines.gov.au/portal/2589/clinical-practice-guidelines-pregnancy-care-2018-edition (viewed Feb 2019).
- Marley JV, Kotz J, Engelke C, et al. Validity and acceptability of Kimberley Mum's Mood Scale to screen for perinatal anxiety and depression in remote Aboriginal health care settings. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0168969.
Linked content
-
MJA Research: Screening for perinatal depression and predictors of underscreening: findings of the Born in Queensland study
-
MJA Letter: In Reply