Decision aids to improve informed decision-making in pregnancy care: a systematic review

被引:94
|
作者
Vlemmix, F. [1 ]
Warendorf, J. K. [1 ]
Rosman, A. N. [1 ]
Kok, M. [1 ]
Mol, B. W. J. [1 ]
Morris, J. M. [2 ]
Nassar, N. [3 ]
机构
[1] Acad Med Ctr, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, NL-1100 DD Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Sydney, Royal N Shore Hosp, St Leonards, NSW 2065, Australia
[3] Univ Sydney, Kolling Inst Med Res, St Leonards, NSW, Australia
关键词
Decision aids; informed decision making; obstetrics; pregnancy health care; systematic review; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; FETAL ABNORMALITIES; PRENATAL-DIAGNOSIS; QUALITY; SUPPORT; CHILDBIRTH; LEAFLET; CHOICES; BIRTH; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1111/1471-0528.12060
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Background Rapid development in health care has resulted in an increasing number of screening and treatment options. Consequently, there is an urgency to provide people with relevant information about benefits and risks of healthcare options in an unbiased way. Decision aids help people to make decisions by providing unbiased non-directive research evidence about all treatment options. Objective To determine the effectiveness of decision aids to improve informed decision making in pregnancy care. Search strategy We searched MEDLINE (19532011), EMBASE (19802011), CENTRAL (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library; 2011, Issue 4), Psycinfo (18062011) and Research Registers of ongoing trials (www.clinicaltrials.gov, www.controlled-trials.com). Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials comparing decision aids in addition to standard care. The study population needed to be pregnant women making actual decisions concerning their pregnancy. Data collection and analysis Two independent researchers extracted data on quality of the randomised controlled trial (GRADE criteria), quality of the decision aid (IPDAS criteria), and outcome measures. Data analysis was undertaken by assessing group differences at first follow up after the interventions. Main results Ten randomised controlled trials could be included. Pooled analyses showed that decision aids significantly increased knowledge, (weighted mean difference 11.06, 95% confidence interval 4.8517.27), decreased decisional conflict scores (weighted mean difference -3.66, 95% confidence interval -6.65 to -0.68) and decreased anxiety (weighted mean difference -1.56, 95% confidence interval -2.75 to -0.43). Conclusions Our systematic review showed the positive effect of decision aids on informed decision making in pregnancy care. Future studies should focus on increasing the uptake of decision aids in clinical practice by identifying barriers and facilitators to implementation.
引用
收藏
页码:257 / 266
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Measures of evidence-informed decision-making competence attributes: a psychometric systematic review
    Emily Belita
    Janet E. Squires
    Jennifer Yost
    Rebecca Ganann
    Trish Burnett
    Maureen Dobbins
    BMC Nursing, 19
  • [42] A systematic review of inventions to improve carer involvement in medical consultations and decision-making
    Keast, Rachael
    Laidsaar-Powell, Rebekah
    Butow, Phyllis
    Costa, Daniel
    Juraskova, Ilona
    ASIA-PACIFIC JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2018, 14 : 135 - 135
  • [43] Interventions to improve ethical decision-making skills in nursing students: A systematic review
    Kasikci, Magfiret
    Yildirim, Zeynep
    NURSING ETHICS, 2025, 32 (02) : 486 - 497
  • [44] Systematic review of shared decision-making in surgery
    de Mik, S. M. L.
    Stubenrouch, F. E.
    Balm, R.
    Ubbink, D. T.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2018, 105 (13) : 1721 - 1730
  • [45] Shared Decision-Making Measures: A Systematic Review
    Ahmad, Muayyad
    Abu Tabar, Nazih
    Othman, Elham H.
    Abdelrahim, Zakaria
    QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2020, 29 (02) : 54 - 66
  • [46] Stress and decision-making in resuscitation: A systematic review
    Groombridge, Christopher James
    Kim, Yesul
    Maini, Amit
    Smit, De Villiers
    Fitzgerald, Mark Christopher
    RESUSCITATION, 2019, 144 : 115 - 122
  • [47] Erratum to: A Review of Shared Decision-Making and Patient Decision Aids in Radiation Oncology
    Kristina DemasWoodhouse
    Katie Tremont
    Anil Vachani
    Marilyn M. Schapira
    Neha Vapiwala
    Charles B. Simone
    Abigail T. Berman
    Journal of Cancer Education, 2017, 32 : 246 - 246
  • [48] Effectiveness of Interactive Digital Decision Aids in Prenatal Screening Decision-making: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Wong, Hong Yat Conrad
    Asim, Saba
    Feng, Qi
    Fu, Sherry Xiao-hong
    Sahota, Daljit Singh
    So, Po Lam
    Dong, Dong
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2023, 25
  • [49] INFORMed choices: Facilitating shared decision-making in health care
    Beckmann, Michael
    Cooper, Catherine
    Pocock, Daniel
    AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2015, 55 (03): : 294 - 297
  • [50] Multicriteria Decision-Making in Diabetes Management and Decision Support: Systematic Review
    Aldaghi, Tahmineh
    Muzik, Jan
    JMIR MEDICAL INFORMATICS, 2024, 12