Perinatal depression screening: a systematic review of recommendations from member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Perinatal depression (PND) screening recommendations are made by national, state-based and professional organisations; however, there is disagreement regarding screening timing, provider responsible, screening setting, screening tool as well as the follow-up and referral pathways required post-screening. This systematic review aimed to identify, describe and compare PND screening recommendations from member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Publications were identified through systematically searching PubMed, Google and the Guidelines International Network (GIN). Recommendations regarding PND screening endorsement, timing, frequency, responsible provider, tools/assessments and follow-up and referral were extracted. Twenty-one publications, including guidelines, from five countries were included. Most made recommendations in support of PND screening using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Details differed regarding terminology used, as well as frequency of screening, follow-up mechanisms and referral pathways. A broad range of health providers were considered to be responsible for screening. This is the first review to identify and compare PND screening recommendations from OECD member countries; however, only online publications published in English, from five countries were included. Heterogeneity of publication types and inconsistency in definitions rendered quality assessment inappropriate. While most publications generally endorsed PND screening, there are exceptions and the associated details pertaining to the actual conduct of screening vary between and within countries. Developing clear, standardised recommendations based on current evidence is necessary to ensure clarity amongst healthcare providers and a comprehensive approach for the early detection of PND.

Mental Health First Aid training and assessment in Australian medical, nursing and pharmacy curricula: a national perspective using content analysis.

BACKGROUND: Suicide is among the leading causes of death among people aged 15 to 29 worldwide. Healthcare professionals interact with people at risk of suicide regularly, yet mental health and crisis first aid training is lacking in curricula. Mental Health First Aid (MHFA) training teaches crucial communication and crisis first aid skills and is increasingly recognised as integral to healthcare education. This study aimed to explore the extent of, as well as barriers and enablers to MHFA training delivery and assessment in Australian medical, nursing and pharmacy curricula. METHODS: All accredited Australian medical, nursing and pharmacy program providers were identified through Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency and National Boards websites and invited to participate in a semi-structured interview. A purpose-designed interview guide explored if and how MHFA training was delivered and assessed in curricula, as well as perceptions of and barriers and enablers to MHFA training. Interview recordings were transcribed verbatim, allowing for deductive content analysis to compare MHFA training provision across programs. RESULTS: Of 75 invited program providers, 36 (48%; 13 medical, 13 nursing and 10 pharmacy) participated, of which 15 representatives (42%; six medical, two nursing and six pharmacy) reported providing MHFA training to students. Differences in mandating training, year level of students completing training, type of training delivered and source of MHFA instructors were identified. Barriers to MHFA implementation included perceived adequacy of existing curricula, lack of funding and time, while facilitators included perceived benefit and availability of funding. CONCLUSION: MHFA training is provided to more than one third of medical, nursing and pharmacy students in Australia. Increased funding may facilitate the integration of MHFA as a minimum standard of mental health training for future healthcare professionals. Further research exploring the effectiveness of MHFA in improving behaviours and its impact on patient outcomes is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was approved by the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee [Project number: 2020/087].