摘要
目的比较产后抑郁筛查量表(PDSS)和爱丁堡产后抑郁量表(EPDS)在产后抑郁筛查中的应用价值。方法分别采用PDSS、爱丁堡产后抑郁量表(EPDS)及美国精神障碍诊断与统计手册第4版轴I障碍定式临床检查患者版(SCID-I/P)对378例产后42d的妇女进行评定,以SCID-I/P作为产后抑郁诊断标准。结果将两种量表的临界值分别界定为76分和13分。PDSS的敏感性为92.00%,特异性为95.25%,阳性预测值为77.02%,阴性预测值为99.01%;EPDS的敏感性为82.26%,特异性为81.33%,阳性预测值为44.73%,阴性预测值为97.30%。两种量表特异性和敏感性差异比较有统计学意义(P<0.05)。PDSS与EPDS阳性预测值比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05),阴性预测值比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论与EPDS比较,PDSS更适合产后抑郁的筛查。
Objective To compare the value of the Postpartum Depression Screening Scale （PDSS） and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression scale （EPDS） in the screening of postpartum depression. Methods A total of 378 women within 42 days postpartum completed PDSS, the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale （EPDS） and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders-Patient Edition （SCID-I/P）. The SCID-I/P was regarded the stan- dard for postpartum depression diagnosis. Results The cut-of score for PDSS and EPDS was 76 and 13, respectively. Sensitivity of PDSS was 92.00%, and specificity was 95.25%, with positive predictive value of 77.02% and negative predictive value of 99.01%. Sensitivity of EPDS was 82.30%, and specificity was 81.33%, with positive predictive val- ue of 44.73% and negative predictive value of 97.30%. The sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value showed significantly difference between PDSS and EPDS （P〈0.05）, and negative predictive value had no statistical significant differece. Conclusion PDSS scale is more suitable for screening postpartum depression than EPDS scale.
出处
《海南医学》
CAS
2013年第14期2080-2082,共3页
Hainan Medical Journal
关键词
产后抑郁筛查量表
爱丁堡产后抑郁量表
产后抑郁
筛查
Postpartum Depression Screening Scale
Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale
Postpartum de- pression
Screening
