Trial of a patient-directed eHealth program to ameliorate perinatal depression: the MomMoodBooster2 practical effectiveness study

BACKGROUND

Depression is one of the most common complications of childbirth, and is experienced by approximately 17% of pregnant women and 13% of postpartum women. An estimated 85% of these women go untreated-an alarming statistic given the serious consequences for the mother, her child, other family members, and society. Professional societies (the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and American Academy of Pediatrics) have recommended improvements in screening and treatment. Meta-analyses indicate that cognitive behavioral therapy eHealth interventions are efficacious for depression, generally, and for perinatal depression, specifically. Earlier controlled trials have established the effectiveness and acceptability of MomMoodBooster (including an Australian version, MumMoodBooster), an eHealth program for ameliorating postpartum depression.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a perinatal version of MomMoodBooster encompassing both prenatal and postpartum content in a healthcare delivery setting already providing universal screening and referral of at-risk patients as part of routine care.

STUDY DESIGN

A practical effectiveness study randomly assigned 95 pregnant and 96 postpartum women screened as depressed and satisfying eligibility criteria to experimental groups: the healthcare organization's perinatal depression care program (routine-care group) and routine care+MomMoodBooster2 program (eHealth group). Eligibility criteria included: pregnant or <1 year postpartum, ≥18 years of age, no active suicidal ideation, access to broadband internet via desktop/laptop, tablet, or smartphone, and English language proficiency.

RESULTS

Intent-to-treat analyses of group effects used fixed-effects growth models to assess 12-week posttest change in outcomes. Results showed that both groups had significantly decreased depression severity, anxiety, stress, and automatic thoughts, and increased behavioral activation and self-efficacy. Relative to the routine-care group, the eHealth group displayed significantly greater decreases in depression severity and stress. These group comparisons were not moderated by depression severity (screening or baseline), anxiety, stress, or pregnant/postpartum status. Almost all (93%; n=89) women in the eHealth group visited their program, of whom 99% visited program sessions (M sessions visited=4.3±2.0; M total session duration=73.0±70.2 minutes; 49% viewed all 6 sessions). Among confirmed eHealth program users who provided ratings, 96% (79/82) rated their program as easy to use, 83% rated it helpful, and 93% (76/82) indicated that they would recommend it.

CONCLUSION

Results support the effectiveness of using MomMoodBooster2 as a treatment option for perinatal women with depression, especially when combined with universal depression screening and referral. Consequently, the eHealth program shows promise as a tool to increase the reach of treatment delivery and to potentially reduce the number of untreated perinatal women with depression.

Feasibility of perinatal mood screening and text messaging on patients' personal smartphones

Screens and adjunctive treatments for perinatal mood are available, but barriers prevent many women from receiving them. Mobile technology may help bypass barriers. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of screening and texting perinatal women via their personal smartphones. This prospective cohort study enrolled 203 pregnant and postpartum women receiving obstetric care at a Midwestern US academic medical center. Participants received one electronic mood screen and three text messages per week for two weeks. Texts were based on the Mothers and Babies Course, a CBT-based preventative program that addresses limited social support, lack of pleasant activities, and harmful thought patterns. Feasibility was defined as the ability to take the mood screen and receive texts without technical difficulties. Demographic variables were paired with results. Insurance type (private or public) was used as a proxy for socioeconomic status. Pearson chi-squared tests were used to analyze the data. A text-based satisfaction survey was also administered. The sample was 72% privately insured and 28% publicly insured. Sixty-seven percent completed electronic screening. Screen completion was significantly associated with private insurance (OR = 3.8, 95% CI 2.00-7.30) and "married" status (OR = 1.93, 95% CI 1.01-3.70). Most survey respondents (92%) found it easy to receive the texts, and 76% responded with very favorable comments about the texts. Smartphone mood screening and supportive texting were technically feasible. Screen completion was lower among single women with public insurance.

The experience of depression, anxiety, and mania among perinatal women

We assessed differential item functioning (DIF) based on computerized adaptive testing (CAT) to examine how perinatal mood disorders differ from adult psychiatric disorders. The CAT-Mental Health (CAT-MH) was administered to 1614 adult psychiatric outpatients and 419 perinatal women with IRB approval. We examined individual item-level differences using logistic regression and overall score differences by scoring the perinatal data using the original bifactor model calibration based on the psychiatric sample data and a new bifactor model calibration based on the perinatal data and computing their correlation. To examine convergent validity, we computed correlations of the CAT-MH with contemporaneously administered Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scales (EPDS). The rate of major depression in the perinatal sample was 13 %. Rates of anxiety, mania, and suicide risk were 5, 6, and 0.4 %, respectively. One of 66 depression items, one of 69 anxiety items, and 15 of 53 mania items exhibited DIF (i.e., failure to discriminate between high and low levels of the disorder) in the perinatal sample based on the psychiatric sample calibration. Removal of these items resulted in correlations of the original and perinatal calibrations of r = 0.983 for depression, r = 0.986 for anxiety, and r = 0.932 for mania. The 91.3 % of cases were concordantly categorized as either "at-risk" or "low-risk" between the EPDS and the perinatal calibration of the CAT-MH. There was little evidence of DIF for depression and anxiety symptoms in perinatal women. This was not true for mania. Now calibrated for perinatal women, the CAT-MH can be evaluated for longitudinal symptom monitoring.

Barriers to mental health treatment among obstetric patients at risk for depression

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to examine mental health referrals outcomes among obstetric patients at risk for depression.

STUDY DESIGN

Fifty-one perinatal women who were offered mental health referrals were queried about their behaviors at 4 steps in the treatment engagement process and factors facilitating or impeding each step.

RESULTS

Although 59% of at-risk women accepted mental health referrals, only 27% ultimately engaged in treatment. Women who proactively sought help via a hotline were more likely to accept referrals (P < .001), contact a referred provider (P < .001), and engage in treatment (P < .05) than those who received unsolicited referrals after screening at-risk for depression. Barriers to successful treatment linkage were identified at the patient, provider, and system levels.

CONCLUSION

Only a minority of women who are at risk for perinatal depression and receive mental health referrals ultimately engage in treatment. Successful linkage may be enhanced via interventions targeting identified barriers; such interventions require prospective evaluation.

Obstetric care provider engagement in a perinatal depression screening program

To investigate obstetric care provider attitudes toward perinatal depression screening and factors associated with variable screening rates. Provider attitudes about depression screening were investigated via structured interviews (open-ended and rating scale questions) and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Most providers (86%) found screening effective at identifying women at risk for perinatal depression (average rating of 8.7 on 10-point analog scale). However, 95% overestimated their own screening rates and 67% inaccurately thought they achieved universal screening. Providers not directly involved in their office-based screening process demonstrated lower average screening rates (37%) than those who maintained active involvement (59%; p = 0.07). Obstetric care providers support perinatal depression screening in the context of a program that assumes responsibility for processing screens, conducts assessments of at-risk women and provides referrals to mental health professionals. Provider participation in screening and tying screening to routine obstetric outpatient activities such as glucose tolerance testing are associated with higher screening rates.

The utility of maternal depression screening in the third trimester

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of maternal depressive risk in patients during the third trimester and to determine whether unique at-risk women are identified when the data are compared with postpartum screening.

STUDY DESIGN

As part of a comprehensive program for universal perinatal depression screening and behavioral health referral of at-risk women, patients completed the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale both during pregnancy (24-28 weeks of gestation) and again at 6 weeks after delivery. Based on Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale scores of > or =12, the prevalence of antepartum depressive risk and the rates of concordant/discordant risk status with the corresponding postpartum results were calculated. Discordant-risk cases were further analyzed to determine whether obstetric, psychosocial, or demographic variables were associated with changing risk status over time.

RESULTS

We screened 1584 women in the third trimester and again after delivery: 7.7% and 6.8% of the women scored in the at-risk range in the antepartum and postpartum time frames, respectively; 88.9% of patients had the same risk status, and 11.1% were discordant before and after delivery. Statistically significant associations were found between premature birth, newborn infant admission to the intensive care nursery, and acquisition of postpartum depressive risk.

CONCLUSION

Screening for depression in the third trimester resulted in a comparable prevalence rate of depressive risk identification when compared with the postpartum time frame. Unique women were identified before and after delivery who may have been missed if screening had not been performed twice.