mHealth for antenatal mental health

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Tablet computers for implementing NICE antenatal mental health guidelines - Feasibility study

  • IRAS ID

    176812

  • Contact name

    Jose S Marcano Belisario

  • Contact email

    jose.marcano-belisario10@imperial.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Imperial College London

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 3 months, 0 days

  • Research summary

    Depression is one of the most common mental health disorders affecting up to 20% of women during pregnancy or within 12 months of giving birth. There are a number of validated instruments that can facilitate its recognition or the identification of increased risk. In the UK, the NICE recommends using the Whooley questions and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression scale. Nonetheless, depression during pregnancy is usually underdiagnosed and its routine screening is currently discouraged.

    Mobile technologies can potentially offer a cost effective way of screening for depression during pregnancy. These technologies could also increase access to treatment options, and enable a prompt and proactive response by the clinical care team. For this reason, we wish to conduct this study to assess the feasibility of using mobile devices (i.e., tablet computers - iPad Air) for implementing the recommendations for recognising depression in pregnancy (i.e., Whooley questions and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale) outlined in the 'Antenatal and Postnatal mental health: clinical management and service guidance' NICE guideline. Both of these surveys have been validated for use in pregnant women. In addition, we will measure the positive predictive value, negative predictive value and false omission rate of the Whooley questions, by comparing the answers given to these questions against scores on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Lastly, we will assess if delivering the Whooley questions and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale via mobile devices affects the quality of the responses collected. The latter is particularly important if we consider that these responses inform clinical decisions.

  • REC name

    London - Surrey Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    15/LO/0977

  • Date of REC Opinion

    9 Jul 2015

  • REC opinion

    Further Information Favourable Opinion