Effectiveness of Telehealth Interventions for Women With Postpartum Depression: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Background: Postpartum depression (PPD) is a prevalent mental health problem with serious adverse consequences for affected women and their infants. Clinical trials have found that telehealth interventions for women with PPD result in increased accessibility and improved treatment effectiveness. How...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | JMIR mHealth and uHealth 2021-10, Vol.9 (10), p.e32544-e32544 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background: Postpartum depression (PPD) is a prevalent mental health problem with serious adverse consequences for affected women and their infants. Clinical trials have found that telehealth interventions for women with PPD result in increased accessibility and improved treatment effectiveness. However, no comprehensive synthesis of evidence from clinical trials by systematic review has been conducted. Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of telehealth interventions in reducing depressive symptoms and anxiety in women with PPD. To enhance the homogeneity and interpretability of the findings, this systematic review focuses on PPD measured by the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). Methods: PubMed, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CNKI, and Wanfang were electronically searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of telehealth interventions for women with PPD from inception to February 28, 2021. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two researchers. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software. Results: Following the search, 9 RCTs with a total of 1958 women with PPD were included. The EPDS (mean difference=–2.99, 95% CI –4.52 to –1.46; P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2291-5222 2291-5222 |
DOI: | 10.2196/32544 |