Investigating the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale Cut‐Off Point and Predictors of Paternal Postnatal Depression in Fathers: A Cross‐Sectional Study
Zahra Jamshidi Khanimani, Mahboubeh Hajifoghaha, Ali Mohammad Keshtvarz Hesam Abadi, Arvin Hedayati, Zahra YazdanpanahiABSTRACT
Aim
To determine the optimal Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale cutoff and identifying risk factors and predictors of paternal postpartum depression.
Design
Cross‐sectional.
Methods
This study was conducted on 240 eligible fathers using a multi‐stage sampling method. Data were collected using a survey about demographic and fertility characteristics and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Then, 77 participants were examined by an experienced psychiatrist via a diagnostic interview based on The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. A receiver operating characteristic curve was used to determine the optimal cut‐off point of the questionnaire to identify those at risk for paternal postnatal depression.
Results
In this study of Iranian fathers, a score greater than 7 was identified as the optimal Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale cut‐off for detecting paternal postnatal depression with established sensitivity and specificity. This cut‐off determined the frequency of paternal postnatal depression. A significant relationship was found between the groups from the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and factors such as life satisfaction, satisfaction with sex life, the gender of the child, pregnancy complications, the gender of previous children and history of abortion.
Conclusion
Paternal postnatal depression has a relatively high frequency.
Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care
Screen fathers for paternal postnatal depression using appropriate tools and ensure timely referral and management.
Impact
The identified Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale cutoff improves screening accuracy for paternal postpartum depression and facilitates early intervention in postnatal care.
Reporting Method
We followed relevant EQUATOR guidelines and reported our observational study according to STROBE guidelines.
Patient or Public Contribution
No patient or public contribution (Due to the nature of the data collection and analysis involved in this study, patient or public involvement in its design, conduct, reporting, or dissemination was not applicable).