English | Français  

Home

Project Results

What is a Quality Measure?

Who is CEQM?

National Consensus

National Consensus Summary

Top 30 Quality Measures

Quality Measures Database

Priority Domains

Data Infrastructure

Measurement Implementation

Knowledge Transfer / Communication

Project Activities

Contact

Links



Staff/Partner log-in
  

Quality Measures Database

Detailed Results


Use checkboxes to select measures to print or display              
Screening for Postnatal Depression Overall Rank: 71
Percent of female primary health care clients/patients who are pregnant or post partum who have been screened (e.g., using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS)) for depression.
Diagnosis and initiation of treatment at very early stages of the disease, when little or minimum intervention can bring therapeutic results (e.g., within the first two years of illness).
Additional Domain(s) : Patients with Reproductive Mental Health Disorders, Speakers of English as a Second Language
Rationale
In practice, screening is already taking place, albeit in varying styles and with varying levels of resources. While evidence may not yet be available to meet the strictest criteria for recommending screening programmes, if programmes are instigated they should conform to best available research evidence on effectiveness, be adequately resourced, and include ongoing evaluation as an integral part of the programme.
Concerns have been expressed that the EPDS may perform less well in cases where there are psychomotor symptoms (often suggestive of severe depression). More work is required on the timing and number of administrations, and on appropriate cut-offs to use.
There is some evidence that, in research settings, combining two screening tools (the EPDS and the General Health Questionnaire, GHQ) may be more effective than either tool alone.

Primary Reference
Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network Postnatal Depression and Puerperal Psychosis. Clinical Guideline 60. June 2002; Section 2.3.3; pp. 5 Retrieved on August 3, 2006 from: http://www.sign.ac.uk/pdf/sign60.pdf
Level of Evidence
III: Preliminary research evidence only or evidence based on consensus opinion only.

Summarized CommentsAdd Comment
  • * If specific diagnostic tools are promoted in national indicators, then they need to be reviewed and recommended by an expert panel.
Variation in Results
Ratings-based Rank
Relevance 81
Actionability 41
Overall Importance 91
 
Stakeholder Rank
Academics 46
Clinicians 81
Consumers 98
Decision Makers 63
 
Special Group Rank
First Nations 68
Rural Areas 62
Federal Stakeholders 44
Regional Rank
BC AB SK MB ON QC NB NS PE NL YT NT NU
65 51 80 100 68 78 113 74 84 81 30 27 105
 
Overall Rank

      

71


SA15f (B722)

 
Distribution of Survey Respondent Ratings
Relevance
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 0 0.97 0.43 4.78 9.62 29.38 35.73 19.1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Low High
Actionability
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 0.72 0.97 0.79 5.18 11.64 34.56 27.29 18.85
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Low High
Overall Importance
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
3.52 50.39 46.09
3 2 1

3 = can live without
2 = nice to have
1 = indispensable
Use checkboxes to select measures to print or display              

Copyright © 2006 CEQM and CARMHA • infoceqm-acmq.com

The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the official policies of Health Canada