Abstract
Background—Depression is common in low-income pregnant women, and treatments need to be fitted to meet their needs. We conducted a randomized controlled trial comparing brief interpersonal psychotherapy (brief-IPT) to enhanced treatment as usual (ETAU) for perinatal depression in low-income women. The brief-IPT model is designed to better engage low-income women by utilizing an engagement session, providing flexible delivery of sessions, and pragmatic case management.
Methods—Pregnant women, aged ≥ 18, between 12–30 weeks gestation were recruited from an urban prenatal clinic. Women scoring ≥ 10 on the Edinburgh Depression Scale and meeting depressive disorder criteria were randomized to either brief-IPT (n=21) or ETAU (n=21). We assessed treatment outcomes, acceptability, and feasibility of the intervention (measured by session ttendance).
Results—Depression scores significantly decreased in both brief-IPT and ETAU. Brief-IPT participants reported significant improvements in social support satisfaction as compared to ETAU participants, even after controlling for concurrent depressive symptoms. Brief-IPT participants reported high satisfaction with the program. However, many participants did not participate in the full 9-session course of treatment (average sessions attended = 6, range 0–17).
Limitations—Small sample size, use of self-report measures, and lack of an active psychotherapy control group limits interpretation of study results.
Conclusions—Brief-IPT for perinatal depression is acceptable to low-income women and is helpful for improving depressive symptoms and social support. However, feasibility of the treatment was limited by relatively low session attendance in spite of efforts to maximize treatment engagement. Additional modifications to meet the needs of low-income women are discussed.
