Risk Factors for Postpartum Depression: A Retrospective Investigation at 4-Weeks Postnatal and a Review of the Literature
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
4-1-2006
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe possible correlations between incidence of postpartum depression and the following patient characteristics: age, breastfeeding status, tobacco use, marital status, history of depression, and method of delivery.
STUDY DESIGN: Data gathered at routine 4-week postnatal visits were obtained from the patient records of 209 women who gave birth between June 1, 2001, and June 1, 2003, at three university medical clinics in Tulsa, Okla. Inclusion criteria required that the records of potential study subjects contain data on the characteristics noted as well as patient-completed Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale forms.
RESULTS: Formula feeding in place of breastfeeding, a history of depression, and cigarette smoking were all significant risk factors for an Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale score of 13 or higher, indicating probable postpartum depression.
CONCLUSION: The authors' findings corroborate the results of previous investigators. To facilitate prophylactic patient education and intervention strategies, a larger study is recommended to determine risk factors for postpartum depression.
Publication Title
The Journal of the American Osteopathic Association
Volume
106
Issue
4
First Page
193
Last Page
198
PubMed ID
16627773
Recommended Citation
McCoy, Sarah J. Breese; Beal, J. Martin; Shipman, Stacia B. Miller; Payton, Mark E.; and Watson, Gary H., "Risk Factors for Postpartum Depression: A Retrospective Investigation at 4-Weeks Postnatal and a Review of the Literature" (2006). PCOM Scholarly Works. 96.
https://digitalcommons.pcom.edu/scholarly_papers/96
Comments
This article was published in Journal of the American Osteopathic Association, Volume 106, Issue 4, April 2006, Pages 193-198.
The published version is available at http://www.jaoa.org/content/106/4/193.long
Copyright © 2006 by the American Osteopathic Association
Erratum:
Journal of the American Osteopathic Association, Volume 106, Issue 12, December 2006, Page: 687.
Journal of the American Osteopathic Association. Volume 108, April 2008, Issue 4, Page :217.