Developing and Validating a Perinatal Depression Screening Tool in Bungoma County, Kenya

Background: Depression-screening tools exist and are widely used in Western settings. There have been few studies done to explore whether or not existing tools are valid and effective to use in sub-Saharan Africa. Our study aimed to develop and validate a perinatal depression-screening tool in rural Kenya.

Methods: We utilized conducted free listing and card sorting exercises with a purposive sample of 12 women and 38 CHVs living in a rural community to explore the manifestations of perinatal depression in that setting. We used the information obtained to produce a locally relevant depression-screening tool that comprised of existing Western psychiatric concepts and locally derived items. Subsequently, we administered the novel depression-screening tool and two existing screening tools (the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9) to 193 women and compared the results of the screening tool with that of a gold standard structured clinical interview to determine validity.

Results: The free listing and card sorting exercise produced a set of 60 screening items. Of the items in this set, we identified the 10 items that most accurately classified cases and non-cases. This 10-item scale had a sensitivity of 100.0 and specificity of 81.2. This compared to 90.0, 31.5 and 90.0, 49.7 for the EPDS and the PHQ-9, respectively. Overall, we found a prevalence of depression of 5.2 percent.

Conclusions: The new scale does very well in terms of diagnostic validity, having the highest scores in this domain compared to the EPDS, EPDS-R and PHQ-9. The adapted scale does very well with regards to convergent validity-illustrating clear distinction between mean scores across the different categories. It does well with regards to discriminant validity, internal consistency reliability, and test-retest reliability- not securing top scores in those domains but still yielding satisfactory results.

Development and validation of a rapid, aldehyde dehydrogenase bright-based cord blood potency assay.

Banked, unrelated umbilical cord blood provides access to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for patients lacking matched bone marrow donors, yet 10% to 15% of patients experience graft failure or delayed engraftment. This may be due, at least in part, to inadequate potency of the selected cord blood unit (CBU). CBU potency is typically assessed before cryopreservation, neglecting changes in potency occurring during freezing and thawing. Colony-forming units (CFUs) have been previously shown to predict CBU potency, defined as the ability to engraft in patients by day 42 posttransplant. However, the CFU assay is difficult to standardize and requires 2 weeks to perform. Consequently, we developed a rapid multiparameter flow cytometric CBU potency assay that enumerates cells expressing high levels of the enzyme aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH bright [ALDH(br)]), along with viable CD45(+) or CD34(+) cell content. These measurements are made on a segment that was attached to a cryopreserved CBU. We validated the assay with prespecified criteria testing accuracy, specificity, repeatability, intermediate precision, and linearity. We then prospectively examined the correlations among ALDH(br), CD34(+), and CFU content of 3908 segments over a 5-year period. ALDH(br) (r = 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.79), but not CD34(+) (r = 0.25; 95% CI, 0.22-0.28), was strongly correlated with CFU content as well as ALDH(br) content of the CBU. These results suggest that the ALDH(br) segment assay (based on unit characteristics measured before release) is a reliable assessment of potency that allows rapid selection and release of CBUs from the cord blood bank to the transplant center for transplantation.

Autonomic cardiovascular dysregulation as a potential mechanism underlying depression and coronary artery bypass grafting surgery outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is often used to treat patients with significant coronary heart disease (CHD). To date, multiple longitudinal and cross-sectional studies have examined the association between depression and CABG outcomes. Although this relationship is well established, the mechanism underlying this relationship remains unclear. The purpose of this study was twofold. First, we compared three markers of autonomic nervous system (ANS) function in four groups of patients: 1) Patients with coronary heart disease and depression (CHD/Dep), 2) Patients without CHD but with depression (NonCHD/Dep), 3) Patients with CHD but without depression (CHD/NonDep), and 4) Patients without CHD and depression (NonCHD/NonDep). Second, we investigated the impact of depression and autonomic nervous system activity on CABG outcomes. METHODS: Patients were screened to determine whether they met some of the study's inclusion or exclusion criteria. ANS function (i.e., heart rate, heart rate variability, and plasma norepinephrine levels) were measured. Chi-square and one-way analysis of variance were performed to evaluate group differences across demographic, medical variables, and indicators of ANS function. Logistic regression and multiple regression analyses were used to assess impact of depression and autonomic nervous system activity on CABG outcomes. RESULTS: The results of the study provide some support to suggest that depressed patients with CHD have greater ANS dysregulation compared to those with only CHD or depression. Furthermore, independent predictors of in-hospital length of stay and non-routine discharge included having a diagnosis of depression and CHD, elevated heart rate, and low heart rate variability. CONCLUSIONS: The current study presents evidence to support the hypothesis that ANS dysregulation might be one of the underlying mechanisms that links depression to cardiovascular CABG surgery outcomes. Thus, future studies should focus on developing and testing interventions that targets modifying ANS dysregulation, which may lead to improved patient outcomes.

Developing drugs for developing countries.

Infectious and parasitic diseases create enormous health burdens, but because most of the people suffering from these diseases are poor, little is invested in developing treatments. We propose that developers of treatments for neglected diseases receive a "priority review voucher." The voucher could save an average of one year of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and be sold by the developer to the manufacturer of a blockbuster drug. In a well-functioning market, the voucher would speed access to highly valued treatments. Thus, the voucher could benefit consumers in both developing and developed countries at relatively low cost to the taxpayer.