Uptake of referrals for women with positive perinatal depression screening results and the effectiveness of interventions to increase uptake: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AimsPerinatal depression threatens the health of maternal women and their offspring. Although screening programs for perinatal depression exist, non-uptake of referral to further mental health care after screening reduces the utility of these programs. Uptake rates among women with positive screening varied widely across studies and little is known about how to improve the uptake rate. This study aimed to systematically review the available evidence on uptake rates, estimate the pooled rate, identify interventions to improve uptake of referral and explore the effectiveness of those interventions.MethodsThis systematic review has been registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42019138095). We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Ovid, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang Database and VIP Databases from database inception to January 13, 2019 and scanned reference lists of relevant researches for studies published in English or Chinese. Studies providing information on uptake rate and/or effectiveness of interventions on uptake of referral were eligible for inclusion. Studies were excluded if they did not report the details of the referral process or did not provide exact uptake rate. Data provided by observational studies and quasi-experimental studies were used to estimate the pooled uptake rate through meta-analysis. We also performed meta-regression and subgroup analyses to explore the potential source of heterogeneity. To evaluate the effectiveness of interventions, we conducted descriptive analyses instead of meta-analyses since there was only one randomised controlled trial (RCT).ResultsOf 2302 records identified, 41 studies were eligible for inclusion, including 39 observational studies (n = 9337), one quasi-experimental study (n = 43) and one RCT (n = 555). All but two studies were conducted in high-income countries. The uptake rates reported by included studies varied widely and the pooled uptake rate of referral was 43% (95% confidence intervals [CI] 35–50%) by a random-effect model. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses both showed that referral to on-site assessment or treatment (60%, 95% CI 51–69%) had a significantly higher uptake rate than referral to mental health service (32%, 95% CI 23–41%) (odds ratio 1.31, 95% CI 1.13–1.52). The included RCT showed that the referral intervention significantly improved the uptake rate (p ＜ 0.01).ConclusionsAlmost three-fifths of women with positive screening results do not take up the referral offers