A Factor Analysis of Two Post-Partum Depression Assessments Used in the Hospital Setting
Faculty Mentor(s)
Nancy Roberts, RN, CCE (Spectrum Health); Karen J. Vander Laan, PhD, MSN, RN (Spectrum Health); Barbara Vincensi PhD, RN, FNP-BC
Document Type
Poster
Event Date
4-12-2013
Abstract
A woman’s risk for post-partum depression (PPD) can be assessed in the hospital setting. Two instruments, the Post-Partum Depression Risk Assessment (PDRA) and the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Screen (EPDS), are used in a large Midwestern hospital. The purpose of this study was to determine if the PDRA and EPDS were measuring different elements of PPD using factor analysis, identifying items that clustered together. Nola Pender’s Health Promotion Model informed the study because how a mother perceives her risk of PPD will lead to taking preventative action if PPD symptoms occur. This study was a factor analysis of PDRA and EPDS risk assessment using de-identified data collected from a convenience sample of 585 mothers within 24 hours of delivery. The variable self-harm from the PDRA was eliminated because there were no occurrences of this variable in the dataset. Principal components analysis was conducted using oblique rotation, initially revealing four components. These components loaded on four factors, which were stress, emotional response, history, and selfharm. Emotional response was composed of only factors from the EPDS, history from PDRA, and harm was only one question from the EPDS. Limitations for the factor analysis include this study being the first to compare the PDRA and the EPDS, and data collection from only one healthcare institution. Conclusions are that the PDRA and the EPDS are measuring different factors. The PDRA focuses on history, whereas the EPDS focuses on the current pregnancy. Therefore, when evaluating PPD, both PDRA and EPDS should be used. Further research is needed.
Recommended Citation
A recommended citation will become available once a downloadable file has been added to this entry.
