Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

A comparison of the PHQ-2 and MGMQ for screening for emotional health difficulties during pregnancy.
J Affect Disord. 2018 07; 234:174-179.JA

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Routine screening for emotional health difficulties in women during pregnancy is now advocated in several countries. There is a need therefore to compare the performance of different self-report measures to accomplish this. This study reports on the comparative performance of two such measures- the well-established PHQ-2, which aims to detect depression, and the more recent MGMQ, which aims to detect a wide array of negative emotions.

METHOD

Women (N = 2292) attending a public hospital antenatal clinic over a 14-month period completed the two measures, either on their own (72%), verbally administered by the midwife (25%), or with an interpreter (3%).

RESULTS

Similar rates of women screened positive on each instrument (PHQ-2: 11.6%; MGMQ: 12.3%), but the overlap between the two measures was low. The PHQ-2 only detected 58% of the MGMQ screen positive women, while the MGMQ detected 89.5% of the PHQ-2 screen positive women. No clinically meaningful difference in screen positive rates on either measure was evident for the administration method.

LIMITATIONS

No demographic data were available apart from gestational age, and only about half the women presenting to the clinic during the time period were screened with the measures.

CONCLUSION

The MGMQ detected a greater proportion of women screening positive on the PHQ-2 than vice-versa. This is part due to the MGMQ's focus on a wider range of negative emotions than just depression. Accumulating evidence for this MGMQ indicates that clinical services can consider using this simple measure if they wish to screen for a broad range of negative emotions during pregnancy and postnatally.

Authors+Show Affiliations

South Western Sydney Local Health District; University of Sydney and UNSW, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: stephen.matthey@sswahs.nsw.gov.au.Mums Matter Psychology, Melbourne, Australia.

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

29529551

Citation

Matthey, Stephen, and Frances Bilbao. "A Comparison of the PHQ-2 and MGMQ for Screening for Emotional Health Difficulties During Pregnancy." Journal of Affective Disorders, vol. 234, 2018, pp. 174-179.
Matthey S, Bilbao F. A comparison of the PHQ-2 and MGMQ for screening for emotional health difficulties during pregnancy. J Affect Disord. 2018;234:174-179.
Matthey, S., & Bilbao, F. (2018). A comparison of the PHQ-2 and MGMQ for screening for emotional health difficulties during pregnancy. Journal of Affective Disorders, 234, 174-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2018.02.069
Matthey S, Bilbao F. A Comparison of the PHQ-2 and MGMQ for Screening for Emotional Health Difficulties During Pregnancy. J Affect Disord. 2018;234:174-179. PubMed PMID: 29529551.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - A comparison of the PHQ-2 and MGMQ for screening for emotional health difficulties during pregnancy. AU - Matthey,Stephen, AU - Bilbao,Frances, Y1 - 2018/02/27/ PY - 2017/08/23/received PY - 2018/02/12/revised PY - 2018/02/25/accepted PY - 2018/3/13/pubmed PY - 2018/9/7/medline PY - 2018/3/13/entrez KW - Assessment KW - Depression KW - Distress KW - Perinatal mental health KW - Screening SP - 174 EP - 179 JF - Journal of affective disorders JO - J Affect Disord VL - 234 N2 - BACKGROUND: Routine screening for emotional health difficulties in women during pregnancy is now advocated in several countries. There is a need therefore to compare the performance of different self-report measures to accomplish this. This study reports on the comparative performance of two such measures- the well-established PHQ-2, which aims to detect depression, and the more recent MGMQ, which aims to detect a wide array of negative emotions. METHOD: Women (N = 2292) attending a public hospital antenatal clinic over a 14-month period completed the two measures, either on their own (72%), verbally administered by the midwife (25%), or with an interpreter (3%). RESULTS: Similar rates of women screened positive on each instrument (PHQ-2: 11.6%; MGMQ: 12.3%), but the overlap between the two measures was low. The PHQ-2 only detected 58% of the MGMQ screen positive women, while the MGMQ detected 89.5% of the PHQ-2 screen positive women. No clinically meaningful difference in screen positive rates on either measure was evident for the administration method. LIMITATIONS: No demographic data were available apart from gestational age, and only about half the women presenting to the clinic during the time period were screened with the measures. CONCLUSION: The MGMQ detected a greater proportion of women screening positive on the PHQ-2 than vice-versa. This is part due to the MGMQ's focus on a wider range of negative emotions than just depression. Accumulating evidence for this MGMQ indicates that clinical services can consider using this simple measure if they wish to screen for a broad range of negative emotions during pregnancy and postnatally. SN - 1573-2517 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/29529551/A_comparison_of_the_PHQ_2_and_MGMQ_for_screening_for_emotional_health_difficulties_during_pregnancy_ L2 - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0165-0327(17)31544-6 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -