Shared decision aids in pregnancy care: A scoping review

被引:25
|
作者
Kennedy, Kate [1 ]
Adelson, Pamela [1 ,2 ]
Fleet, Julie [2 ]
Steen, Mary [2 ]
McKellar, Lois [2 ]
Eckert, Marion [1 ]
Peters, Micahdj [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ South Australia, Sch Nursing & Midwifery, Div Hlth Sci, Rosemary Bryant AO Res Ctr, GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
[2] Univ South Australia, Mothers Babies & Families Hlth Res Grp, Rosemary Bryant AO Res Ctr, Sch Nursing & Midwifery,Div Hlth Sci, Adelaide, SA, Australia
关键词
CESAREAN-SECTION; WOMEN; TRIAL; INFORMATION; AUSTRALIA; DELIVERY; CHOICES; BIRTH; MODE;
D O I
10.1016/j.midw.2019.102589
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Background: Shared decision making in pregnancy, labour, and birth is vital to woman-centred care and despite strong evidence for the effectiveness of shared decision making in pregnancy care, practical uptake has been slow. Design and Aim: This scoping review aimed to identify and describe effective and appropriate shared decision aids designed to be provided to women in the antenatal period to assist them in making informed decisions for both pregnancy and birth. Two questions guided the enquiry: (i) what shared decision aids for pregnancy and perinatal care are of appropriate quality and feasibility for application in Australia? (ii) which of these decision aids have been shown to be effective and appropriate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, culturally diverse women, or those with low literacy? Methods: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) was used to conduct the review. Five key databases and selected grey literature sources were examined. English language evidence from Australia, Europe, Canada, United Kingdom, New Zealand, and United States of America produced from 2009 was eligible for inclusion, checked against apriori inclusion criteria, and assessed for quality and usability using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. Results: From a total of 5,209 search results, 35 sources of evidence reporting on 27 decision aids were included following title/abstract and full-text review. Most of the decision aids concerned decisions around birth (52%, n = 14) or antenatal screening 37% (n = 10). The quality of the decision aids was moderate to high, with most communicating risks, benefits, and choice pathways via a mix of Likert-style scales, quizzes, and pictures or graphs. Use of decision aids resulted in significant reductions in decisional conflict and increased knowledge. The format of decision aids appeared to have no effect on these outcomes, indicating that paper-based are as effective as video- or audio-based decision aids. Eleven decision aids were suitable for low literacy or low health literacy women, and six were either developed for culturally diverse groups or have been translated into other languages. No decision aids found were specific to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Conclusions and implications for practice: The 27 decision aids are readily adoptable into westernised healthcare settings and can be used by midwives or multidisciplinary teams in conjunction with women. Decision aids are designed to support women, and families to arrive at informed choices and supplement the decision-making process rather than to replace consumer-healthcare professional interaction. If given before an appointment, high quality decision aids can increase a woman's familiarity with medical terminology, options for care, and an insight into personal values, thereby decreasing decisional conflict and increasing knowledge. (c) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] The Impact of Shared Decision-Making in Perinatal Care: A Scoping Review
    Megregian, Michele
    Emeis, Cathy
    Nieuwenhuijze, Marianne
    JOURNAL OF MIDWIFERY & WOMENS HEALTH, 2020, 65 (06) : 777 - 788
  • [2] Exploration of decision aids to support advance care planning: A scoping review
    Xu, Ying
    Han, Ping-ping
    Su, Xiao-qin
    Xue, Ping
    Guo, Yu-jie
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2024, 33 (09) : 3477 - 3497
  • [3] Decision Aids in the ICU: a scoping review
    Lei, Yuling
    Zhou, Qi
    Tao, Yuexian
    BMJ OPEN, 2023, 13 (08):
  • [4] Shared decision-making with patients with complex care needs: a scoping review
    Perron, M. E.
    Hudon, C.
    Roux-Levy, P. H.
    Poitras, M. E.
    BMC PRIMARY CARE, 2024, 25 (01):
  • [5] shared decision-making with users with complex care needs: a scoping review
    Perron, Marie-Eve
    Poitras, Marie-Eve
    Hudon, Catherine
    ANNALS OF FAMILY MEDICINE, 2024, 22
  • [6] Shared decision making in rheumatology: A scoping review
    Morrison, Tessalyn
    Foster, Erin
    Dougherty, Jacob
    Barton, Jennifer
    SEMINARS IN ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM, 2022, 56
  • [7] Shared Decision Making in Ophthalmology: A Scoping Review
    Bouaziz, Michael
    Cheng, Tiffany
    Minuti, Aurelia
    Denisova, Ksenia
    Barmettler, Anne
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY, 2022, 237 : 146 - 153
  • [8] Decision aids to improve informed decision-making in pregnancy care: a systematic review
    Vlemmix, F.
    Warendorf, J. K.
    Rosman, A. N.
    Kok, M.
    Mol, B. W. J.
    Morris, J. M.
    Nassar, N.
    BJOG-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY, 2013, 120 (03) : 257 - 266
  • [9] Maternity clinician use of shared decision-making in antenatal care: A scoping review
    Hawke, Madeline
    Considine, Julie
    Sweet, Linda
    BIRTH-ISSUES IN PERINATAL CARE, 2024, 51 (03): : 475 - 483
  • [10] Shared decision-making in neurosurgery: a scoping review
    Alba Corell
    Annie Guo
    Tomás Gómez Vecchio
    Anneli Ozanne
    Asgeir S. Jakola
    Acta Neurochirurgica, 2021, 163 : 2371 - 2382