Evaluating the Use of a Decision Aid for Parents Facing Extremely Premature Delivery: A Randomized Trial

Development of a checklist for evaluation of shared decision-making in consultation for extremely preterm delivery

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making (SDM) between parents facing extremely preterm delivery and the medical team is recommended to develop the best course of action for neonatal care. We aimed to describe the creation and testing of a literature-based checklist to assess SDM practices for consultation with parents facing extremely preterm delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

The checklist of SDM counseling behaviors was created after literature review and with expert consensus. Mock consultations with a standardized patient facing extremely preterm delivery were performed, video-recorded, and scored using the checklist. Intraclass correlation coefficients and Cronbach's alpha were calculated.

RESULT

The checklist was moderately reliable for all scorers in aggregate. Differences existed between subcategories within classes of scorer, and between scorer classes. Agreement was moderate between expert scorers, but poor between novice scorers. Internal consistency of the checklist was excellent (Cronbach's alpha = 0.93).

CONCLUSION

This novel checklist for evaluating SDM shows promise for use in future research, training, and clinical settings.

Qualitative analysis of mothers' perception related to the delivery of information regarding preterm births

BACKGROUND

Preterm birth is a major health issue due to its potential outcomes and socioeconomic impact. Prenatal counseling is of major importance for parents because it is believed that the risk of preterm birth is associated with a higher parental mental burden. Nowadays in France, the content and delivery of antenatal counseling is based on personal experience since there is a lack of official guidelines. The goal of the study was to evaluate maternal perception of antenatal information delivered in the setting of preterm births.

METHODS

A qualitative study was performed using semi-structured individual interviews of 15 mothers with a child born > 26-34 GW. Data analysis was based on a constant comparative method.

RESULTS

Concerning prenatal counseling content, parents wanted to be informed of their role in the care of their preterm child more so than statistics that were not always considered relevant. Parents' reactions to the announcement of the risk of a preterm birth was dominated by stupefaction, uncertainty and anxiety. When it comes to the setting of prenatal counseling, patients' room was deemed an appropriate setting by parents and ideally the presence of a coparent was appreciated as it increased patients' understanding. The physicians' attitude during the counseling was considered appropriate and described as empathic and optimistic. The importance of support throughout the hospitalization in the form of other parents' experiences, healthcare professionals and the possibility to preemptively visit the NICU was emphasized by participants. Delivery experience was dominated by a sense of uncertainty, and urgency. Some leads for improvement included additional support of information such as virtual NICU visit; participants also insisted on continuity of care and the multidisciplinary aspect of counseling (obstetrician, neonatologist, midwife, nurse, lactation consultant and psychologist).

CONCLUSION

Highlighting parents' expectations about prenatal counseling could lead to the establishment of overall general guidelines. However, some topics like the use of statistics and mentioning the risk of death underline the importance of a personalized information.

Optimistic vs Pessimistic Message Framing in Communicating Prognosis to Parents of Very Preterm Infants: The COPE Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

In the neonatal intensive care unit, there is a lack of understanding about how best to communicate the prognosis of a serious complication to parents.

Objective

To examine parental preferences and the effects of optimistic vs pessimistic message framing when providing prognostic information about a serious complication.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This crossover randomized clinical trial was conducted at a single German university medical center between June and October 2021. Eligible participants were parents of surviving preterm infants with a birth weight under 1500 g. Data were analyzed between October 2021 and August 2022.

Interventions

Alternating exposure to 2 scripted video vignettes showing a standardized conversation between a neonatologist and parents, portrayed by professional actors, about the prognosis of a hypothetical very preterm infant with severe intraventricular hemorrhage. The video vignettes differed in the framing of identical numerical outcome estimates as either probability of survival and probability of nonimpairment (optimistic framing) or a risk of death and impaired survival (pessimistic framing).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was preference odds (ratio of preference for optimistic vs pessimistic framing). Secondary outcomes included state anxiety, perceptions of communication, and recall of numerical estimates.

Results

Of 220 enrolled parents (142 [64.5%] mothers; mean [SD] age: mothers, 39.1 [5.6] years; fathers, 42.7 [6.9] years), 196 (89.1%) preferred optimistic and 24 (10.1%) preferred pessimistic framing (preference odds, 11.0; 95% CI, 6.28-19.10; P < .001). Preference for optimistic framing was more pronounced when presented second than when presented first (preference odds, 5.41; 95% CI, 1.77-16.48; P = .003). State anxiety scores were similar in both groups at baseline (mean difference, -0.34; -1.18 to 0.49; P = .42) and increased equally after the first video (mean difference, -0.55; 95% CI, -1.79 to 0.69; P = .39). After the second video, state anxiety scores decreased when optimistic framing followed pessimistic framing but remained unchanged when pessimistic framing followed optimistic framing (mean difference, 2.15; 95% CI, 0.91 to 3.39; P < .001). With optimistic framing, participants recalled numerical estimates more accurately for survival (odds ratio, 4.00; 95% CI, 1.64-9.79; P = .002) but not for impairment (odds ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.85-2.63; P = .16).

Conclusions and Relevance

When given prognostic information about a serious complication, parents of very preterm infants may prefer optimistic framing. Optimistic framing may lead to more realistic expectations for survival, but not for impairment.

Trial Registration

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS): DRKS00024466.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

Patient decision aids are interventions designed to support people making health decisions. At a minimum, patient decision aids make the decision explicit, provide evidence-based information about the options and associated benefits/harms, and help clarify personal values for features of options. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2003 and last updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of patient decision aids in adults considering treatment or screening decisions using an integrated knowledge translation approach.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted the updated search for the period of 2015 (last search date) to March 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EBSCO, and grey literature. The cumulative search covers database origins to March 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids to usual care. Usual care was defined as general information, risk assessment, clinical practice guideline summaries for health consumers, placebo intervention (e.g. information on another topic), or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted intervention and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made (informed values-based choice congruence) and the decision-making process, such as knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, feeling informed, clear values, participation in decision-making, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were choice, confidence in decision-making, adherence to the chosen option, preference-linked health outcomes, and impact on the healthcare system (e.g. consultation length). We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of 105 studies that were included in the previous review version compared to those published since that update (n = 104 studies). We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This update added 104 new studies for a total of 209 studies involving 107,698 participants. The patient decision aids focused on 71 different decisions. The most common decisions were about cardiovascular treatments (n = 22 studies), cancer screening (n = 17 studies colorectal, 15 prostate, 12 breast), cancer treatments (e.g. 15 breast, 11 prostate), mental health treatments (n = 10 studies), and joint replacement surgery (n = 9 studies). When assessing risk of bias in the included studies, we rated two items as mostly unclear (selective reporting: 100 studies; blinding of participants/personnel: 161 studies), due to inadequate reporting. Of the 209 included studies, 34 had at least one item rated as high risk of bias. There was moderate-certainty evidence that patient decision aids probably increase the congruence between informed values and care choices compared to usual care (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.13; 21 studies, 9377 participants). Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, there was high-certainty evidence that patient decision aids result in improved participants' knowledge (MD 11.90/100, 95% CI 10.60 to 13.19; 107 studies, 25,492 participants), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.34; 25 studies, 7796 participants), and decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -10.02, 95% CI -12.31 to -7.74; 58 studies, 12,104 participants), indecision about personal values (MD -7.86, 95% CI -9.69 to -6.02; 55 studies, 11,880 participants), and proportion of people who were passive in decision-making (clinician-controlled) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.88; 21 studies, 4348 participants). For adverse outcomes, there was high-certainty evidence that there was no difference in decision regret between the patient decision aid and usual care groups (MD -1.23, 95% CI -3.05 to 0.59; 22 studies, 3707 participants). Of note, there was no difference in the length of consultation when patient decision aids were used in preparation for the consultation (MD -2.97 minutes, 95% CI -7.84 to 1.90; 5 studies, 420 participants). When patient decision aids were used during the consultation with the clinician, the length of consultation was 1.5 minutes longer (MD 1.50 minutes, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.20; 8 studies, 2702 participants). We found the same direction of effect when we compared results for patient decision aid studies reported in the previous update compared to studies conducted since 2015.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, across a wide variety of decisions, patient decision aids probably helped more adults reach informed values-congruent choices. They led to large increases in knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, and an active role in decision-making. Our updated review also found that patient decision aids increased patients' feeling informed and clear about their personal values. There was no difference in decision regret between people using decision aids versus those receiving usual care. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of patient decision aids on adherence and downstream effects on cost and resource use.

Strategies to improve interpersonal communication along the continuum of maternal and newborn care: A scoping review and narrative synthesis

Effective interpersonal communication is essential to provide respectful and quality maternal and newborn care (MNC). This scoping review mapped, categorized, and analysed strategies implemented to improve interpersonal communication within MNC up to 42 days after birth. Twelve bibliographic databases were searched for quantitative and qualitative studies that evaluated interventions to improve interpersonal communication between health workers and women, their partners or newborns' families. Eligible studies were published in English between January 1st 2000 and July 1st 2020. In addition, communication studies in reproduction related domains in sexual and reproductive health and rights were included. Data extracted included study design, study population, and details of the communication intervention. Communication strategies were analysed and categorized based on existing conceptualizations of communication goals and interpersonal communication processes. A total of 138 articles were included. These reported on 128 strategies to improve interpersonal communication and were conducted in Europe and North America (n = 85), Sub-Saharan Africa (n = 12), Australia and New Zealand (n = 10), Central and Southern Asia (n = 9), Latin America and the Caribbean (n = 6), Northern Africa and Western Asia (n = 4) and Eastern and South-Eastern Asia (n = 2). Strategies addressed three communication goals: facilitating exchange of information (n = 97), creating a good interpersonal relationship (n = 57), and/or enabling the inclusion of women and partners in the decision making (n = 41). Two main approaches to strengthen interpersonal communication were identified: training health workers (n = 74) and using tools (n = 63). Narrative analysis of these interventions led to an update of an existing communication framework. The categorization of different forms of interpersonal communication strategy can inform the design, implementation and evaluation of communication improvement strategies. While most interventions focused on information provision, incorporating other communication goals (building a relationship, inclusion of women and partners in decision making) could further improve the experience of care for women, their partners and the families of newborns.

Improving neonatal counselling service for premature births

Despite the substantial advancement of neonatal care leading to increased survival of infants of periviable gestation, as young as 22 weeks,1 the anticipated birth of an extremely low gestational age infant remains challenging for both the parents and physician, with regard to decision-making in initiating resuscitation post-delivery. Ideally, the eventual decision should be well informed, ethically sound and mutually agreed upon by the medical team, and alongside parental wishes pre-delivery.2,3

The pregnancy at risk for delivery at the threshold of viability

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To examine updated recommendations for obstetrical interventions that may improve neonatal outcomes in extremely preterm births.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several recent studies of antenatal steroids at the threshold of viability have demonstrated benefits in both survival and survival without major morbidity. This has led to revised recommendations from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologist regarding the timing of antenatal steroids in these extremely preterm fetuses.

SUMMARY

These recent developments have important implications for clinical care in patients at risk for extremely preterm birth based on a model of best practices and shared decision-making.

Mode of delivery in the context of periviable birth: informed deference and shared decision-making

OBJECTIVE

To qualitatively evaluate women's perspectives on shared decision-making for periviable (22-25 weeks' gestational age) mode of delivery (MOD).

STUDY DESIGN

Interviews were conducted at two Midwestern academic hospitals with 30 women hospitalized for threatened periviable delivery between September 2016 and January 2018. Prior to delivery (T1) and at 3-months postpartum (T2), MOD-related decision-making was explored using prompts. Interviews were coded and analyzed using NVivo 12.

RESULT

The majority of women perceived the MOD options as cesarean section or vaginal delivery. Most ultimately preferred "whatever's best for baby." Understanding of MOD risks was limited, and physicians recommended each option equally. Sixteen participants perceived themselves as decision-makers at T1, while at T2, only nine participants identified themselves as such.

CONCLUSION

Informed deference is introduced as a novel concept in the setting of periviable MOD decision-making, whereby the mother defers decisional authority to the provider, the baby, a higher power, or the circumstance itself.

A Qualitative Study of Parental Perspectives on Prenatal Counseling at Extreme Prematurity

OBJECTIVE

To determine parental preferred language, terminology, and approach after prenatal counseling for an anticipated extremely preterm delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

Pregnant persons (and their partners) admitted at 220/7-256/7 weeks of estimated gestation participated in post antenatal-counseling semistructured interviews to explore preferred language and decision-making approaches of their antenatal counseling session. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed, and thematic analysis of the data was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine interviews were conducted representing 28 total prenatal consults. Analysis identified 2 overarching themes impacting the whole counseling experience: the need for reassurance and compassionate communication, while parents traveled along a dynamic decision-making journey they described as fluid and ever-changing. Related themes included the following: (1) Finding Balance: parents reported the importance of balancing positivity and negativity as well as tailoring the amount of information, (2) The Unspoken: parents described assumptions and inferences surrounding language, resuscitation options, and values that can cloud the counseling process, (3) Making the Intangible Tangible: parents reported the importance of varied communication strategies, for example, visuals to better anticipate and prepare, and (4) Team Synergism: Parents expressed desire for communication and consistency among and between teams, which increased trust.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents facing extremely premature delivery generally did not report remembering specific terminology used during prenatal consultation but rather how the language and counseling approach made them feel and affected the decision-making process. These findings have implications for further research and educational intervention design to improve clinicians' counseling practices to better reflect parental preferences and ultimately improve counseling outcomes.

Words matter: exploring communication between parents and neonatologists

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate how neonatologists and NICU parents perceive communication in the NICU.

STUDY DESIGN

A mixed-methods approach using an online survey and three focus groups with NICU parents and neonatologists, utilizing videos of simulated conversations between a neonatologist and mother.

RESULTS

A total of 72 participants responded to the online survey. Parents ranked the invasiveness of common NICU clinical procedures differently than the neonatologist standard but assessed the quality of the simulated conversation similarly. A total of 13 parents and 6 physicians participated in the focus groups. Major themes from both neonatologist and parent focus groups were the impact of making a connection with the parents, the importance of making decisions yet not making assumptions based on the divergent use of language by neonatologists and parents, and providing hope.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents and neonatologists differ in their perception of key aspects of NICU language use and communication but also agree on many aspects.

Seeing it clearly: How to use graphics to guide collaborative consultation in pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine the use of decision aids which may improve shared decision making through an exploration of risk apprehension and modes of collaborative communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision aids such as graphics have a key role in facilitating shared treatment decision making, perhaps particularly in perinatal mental health care. They are most useful within a trusting, two-way conversation.

Decisional Satisfaction, Regret, and Conflict Among Parents of Infants with Neurologic Conditions

OBJECTIVE

To characterize decisional satisfaction, regret, and conflict among parents of critically ill infants with neurologic conditions.

STUDY DESIGN

In this prospective cohort study, we enrolled parents of infants with neurologic conditions in the intensive care unit (ICU). Hospital discharge surveys included the validated Family Satisfaction with the ICU (FS-ICU) decision making subscale, Decision Regret Scale (DRS), and Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). We defined high satisfaction with decision making as an FS-ICU score ≥75, high decisional regret/conflict as DRS/DCS score >25, and within-couple disagreement as a difference of at least 25 points between scores.

RESULTS

We enrolled 61 parents of 40 infants (n = 40 mothers, n = 21 fathers); 35 mothers and 15 fathers completed surveys. Most mothers reported high satisfaction with decision making (27 of 35; 77%) and low decision regret (28 of 35; 80%); 40% (14 of 35) reported high decisional conflict. Mothers and fathers reported higher decisional conflict in the domains of uncertainty and values clarity compared with the domain of effective decision making (Bonferroni-corrected P < .05). There were no differences in decision outcomes between paired mothers and fathers; however, within any given couple, there were numerous instances of disagreement (7 of 15 for decision regret and 5 of 15 for decisional conflict).

CONCLUSIONS

Many parents experience decisional conflict even if they ultimately have high satisfaction and low regret, underscoring the need for decision aids targeting uncertainty and values clarity. Couples frequently experience different levels of decisional regret and conflict.

Decision making at extreme prematurity: Innovation in clinician education

Decision-making at extreme prematurity remains ethically and practically challenging and can result in parental and clinician distress. It is vital that clinicians learn the necessary skills integral to counseling and decision-making with families in these situations. A pedagogical approach to teaching counseling should incorporate adult learning theory, emphasize multidisciplinary team in-situ simulation that links to counseling clinicians' daily practice, and includes critical reflection, debriefing, and program assessment. Multiple educational strategies that train clinicians in advanced communication and decision-making offer promising results to optimize antenatal counseling and shared decision-making for families facing possible delivery at extreme prematurity. Continued process evaluation and innovation in these educational domains are needed while also assessing the effect on patient-centered outcomes.

Prognostic value of clinicians' predictions of neonatal outcomes in counseling at the margin of gestational viability

Within antenatal counseling sessions at the margin of gestational viability, clinicians frequently to use population-based outcome data and statistical models to guide the decision-making process. These tools often utilize non-modifiable prenatal factors to estimate outcomes based on population averages. However, most parents prefer individualized predictions, which cannot be supported by these models. Additionally, prognostic accuracy is limited by institutional practices surrounding active management of infants at the margin of viability. Throughout the literature, parental perspectives emphasize the importance of communicating subjective information, such as providing hope and supporting personal values, over the importance of accurate prognostic information from the clinician. In this review we aim to describe the value of clinician prognoses in the decision-making process at the margin of gestational viability and emphasize the importance of addressing parental values during the counseling process, regardless of the expected outcome.

Personalized communication with parents of children born at less than 25 weeks: Moving from doctor-driven to parent-personalized discussions

Communication with parents is an essential component of neonatal care. For extremely preterm infants born at less than 25 weeks, this process is complicated by the substantial risk of mortality or major morbidity. For some babies with specific prognostic factors, the majority die. Although many of these deaths occur after admission to the intensive care unit, position statements have focused on communication during the prenatal consultation. This review takes a more comprehensive approach and covers personalized and parent-centered communication in the clinical setting during three distinct yet inter-related phases: the antenatal consultation, the neonatal intensive care hospitalization, and the dying process (when this happens). We advocate that a 'one-size-fits-all' communication model focused on standardizing information does not lead to partnerships. It is possible to standardize personalized approaches that recognize and adapt to parental heterogeneity. This can help clinicians and parents build effective partnerships of trust and affective support to engage in personalized decision-making. These practices begin with self-reflection on the part of the clinician and continue with practical frameworks and stepwise approaches supporting personalization and parent-centered communication.

Decision coaching for people making healthcare decisions

BACKGROUND

Decision coaching is non-directive support delivered by a healthcare provider to help patients prepare to actively participate in making a health decision. 'Healthcare providers' are considered to be all people who are engaged in actions whose primary intent is to protect and improve health (e.g. nurses, doctors, pharmacists, social workers, health support workers such as peer health workers). Little is known about the effectiveness of decision coaching.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of decision coaching (I) for people facing healthcare decisions for themselves or a family member (P) compared to (C) usual care or evidence-based intervention only, on outcomes (O) related to preparation for decision making, decisional needs and potential adverse effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library (Wiley), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (Ebsco), Nursing and Allied Health Source (ProQuest), and Web of Science from database inception to June 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where the intervention was provided to adults or children preparing to make a treatment or screening healthcare decision for themselves or a family member. Decision coaching was defined as: a) delivered individually by a healthcare provider who is trained or using a protocol; and b) providing non-directive support and preparing an adult or child to participate in a healthcare decision. Comparisons included usual care or an alternate intervention. There were no language restrictions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened citations, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data on characteristics of the intervention(s) and outcomes. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion to reach consensus. We used the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as the measures of treatment effect and, where possible, synthesised results using a random-effects model. If more than one study measured the same outcome using different tools, we used a random-effects model to calculate the standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI. We presented outcomes in summary of findings tables and applied GRADE methods to rate the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Out of 12,984 citations screened, we included 28 studies of decision coaching interventions alone or in combination with evidence-based information, involving 5509 adult participants (aged 18 to 85 years; 64% female, 52% white, 33% African-American/Black; 68% post-secondary education). The studies evaluated decision coaching used for a range of healthcare decisions (e.g. treatment decisions for cancer, menopause, mental illness, advancing kidney disease; screening decisions for cancer, genetic testing). Four of the 28 studies included three comparator arms.  For decision coaching compared with usual care (n = 4 studies), we are uncertain if decision coaching compared with usual care improves any outcomes (i.e. preparation for decision making, decision self-confidence, knowledge, decision regret, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low.  For decision coaching compared with evidence-based information only (n = 4 studies), there is low certainty-evidence that participants exposed to decision coaching may have little or no change in knowledge (SMD -0.23, 95% CI: -0.50 to 0.04; 3 studies, 406 participants). There is low certainty-evidence that participants exposed to decision coaching may have little or no change in anxiety, compared with evidence-based information. We are uncertain if decision coaching compared with evidence-based information improves other outcomes (i.e. decision self-confidence, feeling uninformed) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. For decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with usual care (n = 17 studies), there is low certainty-evidence that participants may have improved knowledge (SMD 9.3, 95% CI: 6.6 to 12.1; 5 studies, 1073 participants). We are uncertain if decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with usual care improves other outcomes (i.e. preparation for decision making, decision self-confidence, feeling uninformed, unclear values, feeling unsupported, decision regret, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. For decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with evidence-based information only (n = 7 studies), we are uncertain if decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with evidence-based information only improves any outcomes (i.e. feeling uninformed, unclear values, feeling unsupported, knowledge, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Decision coaching may improve participants' knowledge when used with evidence-based information. Our findings do not indicate any significant adverse effects (e.g. decision regret, anxiety) with the use of decision coaching. It is not possible to establish strong conclusions for other outcomes. It is unclear if decision coaching always needs to be paired with evidence-informed information. Further research is needed to establish the effectiveness of decision coaching for a broader range of outcomes.

Decision-making in imminent extreme premature births: perceived shared decision-making, parental decisional conflict and decision regret

OBJECTIVE

To describe levels of perceived shared decision making (SDM), decisional conflict (DC), and decision regret (DR) in prenatal counseling by pregnant women, partners, neonatologists, and obstetricians regarding decision-making around imminent extreme premature birth in which a decision about palliative comfort care versus early intensive care had to be made.

STUDY DESIGN

Multicenter, cross-sectional study using surveys to determine perceived SDM at imminent extreme premature birth in parents and physicians, and to determine DC and DR in parents.

RESULTS

In total, 73 participants from 22 prenatal counseling sessions were included (21 pregnant women, 20 partners, 14 obstetricians, 18 neonatologists). High perceived levels of SDM were found (median 82,2), and low levels of DC (median 23,4) and DR at one month (median 12, 5).

CONCLUSIONS

Reported levels of self-perceived SDM in the setting of prenatal counseling in extreme prematurity were high, by both the parents and the physicians. Levels of DC and DR were low.

Elternzentrierte ethische Entscheidungsfindung für Frühgeborene im Grenzbereich der Lebensfähigkeit – Reflexion über die Bedeutung probabilistischer Prognosen als Entscheidungsgrundlage

Frühgeborene im Grenzbereich der Lebensfähigkeit befinden sich in einer prognostischen Grauzone. Das bedeutet, dass deren Prognose zwar schlecht, aber nicht hoffnungslos ist, woraus folgt, dass nach Geburt lebenserhaltende Behandlungen nicht obligatorisch sind. Die Entscheidung für oder gegen lebenserhaltende Maßnahmen ist wertbeladen und für alle Beteiligten enorm herausfordernd. Sie sollte eine zwischen Eltern und Ärzt*innen geteilte Entscheidung sein, wobei sie unbedingt mit den Präferenzen der Eltern abgestimmt sein sollte. Bei der pränatalen Beratung der Eltern legen die behandelnden Ärzt*innen üblicherweise numerische Schätzungen der Prognose vor und nehmen in der Regel an, dass die Eltern ihre Behandlungspräferenzen davon ableiten. Inwieweit probabilistische Daten die Entscheidungen der Eltern in prognostischen Grauzonen tatsächlich beeinflussen, ist noch unzureichend untersucht. In der hier vorliegenden Arbeit wird eine Studie reflektiert, in welcher die Hypothese geprüft wurde, dass numerisch bessere oder schlechtere kindliche Prognosen die Präferenzen werdender Mütter für lebenserhaltende Maßnahmen nicht beeinflussen. In dieser Studie zeigte sich, dass die elterlichen Behandlungspräferenzen eher von individuellen Einstellungen und Werten als von Überlegungen zu numerischen Ergebnisschätzungen herzurühren scheinen. Unser Verständnis, welche Informationen werdende Eltern, die mit einer extremen Frühgeburt konfrontiert sind, wünschen und brauchen, ist noch immer unvollständig. Bedeutende medizinische Entscheidungen werden keineswegs nur rational und prognoseorientiert gefällt. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wird diskutiert, welchen Einfluss der Prozess der Entscheidungsfindung auf das Beratungsergebnis haben kann und welche Implikationen sich aus den bisher vorliegenden Studienergebnissen ergeben – klinisch-praktisch, ethisch und wissenschaftlich.

Early antenatal counseling in the outpatient setting for high-risk pregnancies: a randomized control trial

OBJECTIVES

Determine if antenatal counseling delivered in the outpatient setting improves parental knowledge and satisfaction without contributing to anxiety.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized control trial at a large academic institution. Mothers at risk for preterm delivery were enrolled following routine maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) visits and randomized to early antenatal counseling of prematurity or standard counseling by MFM providers. The primary outcome was parental knowledge of prematurity. Secondary outcomes included parental satisfaction, anxiety scores, and compliance with recommended follow-up.

RESULTS

Seventy-six women were enrolled, 38 in each group. Early counseling group had higher knowledge scores (86.3 vs 64.3, p = <0.001) and parental satisfaction (p = 0.003). Anxiety scores were similar between the two groups (38.2 vs 40.4, p = 0.53). No difference was noted in compliance with follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Antenatal counseling in the high-risk outpatient setting improved parental knowledge and satisfaction without leading to increased anxiety.

What Information Do Clinicians Deem Important for Counseling Parents Facing Extremely Early Deliveries?: Results from an Online Survey

OBJECTIVE

 The study aimed to better understand how neonatology and maternal fetal medicine (MFM) physicians convey information during antenatal counseling that requires facilitating shared decision-making with parents facing options of resuscitation versus comfort care after extremely early delivery STUDY DESIGN:  Attending physicians at US centers with both Neo and MFM fellowships were invited to answer an original online survey about antenatal counseling for extremely early newborns. The survey assessed information conveyed, processes for facilitating shared decision-making (reported separately), and clinical experiences. Neonatology and MFM responses were compared. Multivariable logistic regression analyzed topics often and seldom discussed by specialty groups with respect to respondents' clinical experience and resuscitation option preferences at different gestational weeks.

RESULTS

 In total, 74 MFM and 167 neonatologists representing 94% of the 81 centers surveyed responded. Grouped by specialty, respondents were similar in counseling experience and distribution of allowing choices between resuscitation and no resuscitation for delivery at specific weeks of gestational ages. MFM versus neonatology reported similar rates of discussing long-term health and developmental concerns and differed in all other categories of topics. Neonatologists were less likely than MFM to discuss caregiver impacts (odds ratio [OR]: 0.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.11-0.18, p < 0.001) and comfort care details (OR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.15-0.25, p < 0.001). Conversely, neonatology versus MFM respondents more frequently reported "usually" discussing topics pertaining to parenting in the NICU (OR: 1.5, 95% CI: 1.2-1.8, p < 0.001) and those regarding stabilizing interventions in the delivery room (OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.4-2.2, p < 0.001). Compared with less-experienced respondents, those with 17 years' or more of clinical experience had greater likelihood in both specialties to say they "usually" discussed otherwise infrequently reported topics pertaining to caregiver impacts.

CONCLUSION

 Parents require information to make difficult decisions for their extremely early newborns. Our findings endorse the value of co-consultation by MFM and neonatology clinicians and of trainee education on antenatal consultation education to support these families.

KEY POINTS

· Neonatology versus MFM counselors provide complementary information.. · More experience was linked to discussing some topics.. · Co-consultation and trainee education is supported.. · What information parents value requires study..

Optimism bias in understanding neonatal prognoses

OBJECTIVE

Discrepancies between physician and parent neonatal prognostic expectations are common. Optimism bias is a possible explanation.

STUDY DESIGN

Parents interpreted hypothetical neonatal prognoses in an online survey.

RESULTS

Good prognoses tended to be interpreted accurately, while poor prognoses were interpreted as less than the stated value. One-third of participants consistently overstated survival for the three lowest prognoses, compared to the sample as a whole. Three significant predictors of such optimistic interpretations were single-parent status (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.2-0.75; p = 0.005), African-American descent (OR 3.78; 95% CI 1.63-8.98; p = 0.002) and the belief that physicians misrepresented prognoses (OR 3.11; 95% CI 1.47-6.65; p = 0.003). Participants' explanations echoed research on optimism bias in clinical and decision science studies.

CONCLUSION

Participants accepted positive prognoses for critically ill neonates, but reinterpreted negative ones as being unduly pessimistic demonstrating optimism bias.

The 30-Minute Sprint: Recognizing Intrapartum Prematurity Counseling Limitations

Describe the characteristics and content of intrapartum counseling provided to women hospitalized for premature birth between 23 and 34 weeks' gestation age (GA). The study was conducted between April and December 2009 in two teaching hospitals with labor and delivery units and level 3 neonatal intensive care units. Counselors completed a postcounseling survey. From 60 sessions, 46 surveys were collected. The median counseling duration was 30 minutes; this was not associated with gestational age. The support-person was not present for most (57%) counseling sessions. There was a positive correlation (p = 0.001) between the number of maternal questions and her education. There was no difference in counseling content across the 23 to 34 weeks' GA regarding delivery room care, physical/mental disability, and vision problems. This study of characteristics and content of premature birth counseling for birth between 23 and 34 weeks' GA found that the duration of most sessions is 30 minutes; the father of the baby is not present during counseling for most premature births, and the topics discussed by counselors are fairly similar and extensive irrespective of the GA. These findings highlight the existing contrast between the recommended counseling practices and the actual practice reported by counselors.

Outcomes following medical termination versus prolonged pregnancy in women with severe preeclampsia before 26 weeks

Objective

To compare maternal complications and describe neonatal outcomes in women with severe preeclampsia at ≤ 26⁺⁰ weeks in two countries with different management policies: expectant management (Brazil) versus termination of pregnancy (France).

Methods

We conducted a retrospective comparative study by reviewing the medical records of women with severe preeclampsia at ≤ 26⁺⁰ weeks, from January 2010 to June 2018, in two centers: Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina, in Sao Paulo, Brazil (where medical abortion is forbidden in this indication) and Hôpital Antoine-Béclère, Clamart, France (where medical termination is accepted). We collected information on maternal characteristics, laboratory tests, maternal complications and fetal and newborn characteristics. We used Student’s t-test and the Mann-Whitney U nonparametric test to compare quantitative variables, and Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test to evaluate the associations between the qualitative variables.

Results

There was no between-group difference in maternal complications during hospitalization (p = 0.846). In Brazil, the rate of cesarean section was 66.7%, and 20% of patients had vertical incision. The rate of spontaneous fetal death was 35.6% and among the live-born infants 26.6% were discharged from hospital. In France, one patient had a cesarean section with vertical incision.

Conclusion

When comparing termination of pregnancy to expectant management in severe preeclampsia before 26 weeks, maternal complications were equivalent but maternal reproductive future might have been compromised in 20% of cases due to a higher risk of uterine rupture in subsequent pregnancies for patients having classic cesarean (vertical incision). 26.6% of children survived the neonatal period when pregnancy was pursued, however we lack information on their long-term follow-up.

Experiences, Knowledge, and Preferences of Canadian Parents Regarding Preterm Mode of Birth

OBJECTIVES

To describe Canadian parents' experiences with mode of birth for preterm singleton pregnancies; knowledge about maternal and infant risks of the different modes of preterm birth, particularly breech birth; and communication preferences with respect to mode of birth.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey of Canadian parents who had experienced the preterm birth of a live-born infant between 2010 and 2019. Data were collected from August to September 2019. The sample size was calculated as requiring 96 participants.

RESULTS

Of the 153 respondents, 152 were mothers. Respondents were approximately evenly split between those who had experienced an extremely preterm birth (<28 wk), a very preterm birth (28-31 wk), or a moderate-to-late preterm birth (32-36 wk). Most parents reported that mode of birth was discussed before the birth (61.7%, 73.3% and 77.3% for extremely, very, and moderate-to-late preterm births, respectively). The minority of parents reported being given a choice about mode of birth (20.8%, 23.0%, and 36.4% for extremely, very, and moderate-to-late preterm births, respectively). The use of written material during discussion on mode of birth was rare (2.1%, 3.3% and 6.8% for extremely, very, and moderate-to-late preterm births, respectively). Of women who had a cesarean delivery, 39.6% (36/91) were unaware of the maternal risks. Many parents expressed preference for both oral and written communication during counselling on mode of birth (62.6%).

CONCLUSION

Few Canadian parents reported receiving a choice about mode of preterm birth, being aware of associated risks, or receiving written information. There is an urgent need to develop tools that provide information for parents facing preterm birth.

Frühgeborene an der Grenze der Lebensfähigkeit (Entwicklungsstufe S2k, AWMF-Leitlinien-Register Nr. 024/019, Juni 2020)

Redaktionskomitee Federführende Fachgesellschaft

Prenatal consults with illustrated literature (PnCIL): a RCT studying visual aids during prenatal consults

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesize that addition of illustrated handouts during prenatal consultations decreases maternal anxiety and improves maternal knowledge.

STUDY DESIGN

Inpatient gravid women at 25 0/7-34 6/7 weeks gestation were randomized to Standard or Illustrated consults, verbal consults supplemented with a visual handout. Post consult surveys were administered assessing maternal anxiety and knowledge acquisition.

RESULT

We enrolled 82 women; 54 to Standard Consult, 28 to Illustrated Consult. Consult duration was the same across arms. Anxiety and knowledge were not impacted by the intervention overall. We found higher mean knowledge by 17% for consults ≥31 min (P = 0.006; 95% CI 0.67-3.82), and 13% in primigravids (P = 0.032; 95% CI 0.15-3.21) in the intervention arm.

CONCLUSIONS

Using illustrated handouts is feasible and does not increase duration of prenatal consults. It may improve knowledge acquisition in long consults and in primigravida women, although it does not impact anxiety and knowledge overall.

Effect of Neonatal Outcome Estimates on Decision-Making Preferences of Mothers Facing Preterm Birth: A Randomized Clinical Trial

This randomized clinical trial examines the effect of neonatal outcomes on the preferences for expectant German mothers for life-sustaining treatments.

Decision aids available for parents making end-of-life or palliative care decisions for children: A scoping review

AIM

To identify and assess the quality of decision aids that align the decision, values and information provided for parents making end-of-life or palliative care decisions for children with life-threatening conditions.

METHODS

Six databases and the grey literature were searched in December 2018. Two reviewers independently reviewed database citations, and one reviewed grey literature citations. Citation chaining via Scopus was conducted. Quality was assessed using IPDAS Collaboration Criteria.

RESULTS

After reviewing 18 671 database citations and 10 988 grey literature citations, 18 citations describing 11 decision aids remained. Decision aids targeted premature infants, children requiring airway management, children with cancer and children with scoliosis. Three aids underwent testing beyond initial development. Quality scores averaged 27 of 50 points.

CONCLUSIONS

There are few high-quality decision aids available for use and a lack evidence of widespread clinical use. Additional research is needed to support systematic development and the use of decision aids with families.

Historical Perspectives: Shared Decision Making in the NICU

The ethical dilemmas and predominant frameworks surrounding decision making for critically ill newborns have evolved substantially over the last 40 years. A shared decision-making approach is now favored, involving an exchange of information between parents and clinicians that emphasizes parental values and preferences, resulting in a personalized approach to decision making. In this review, we summarize the history of clinical decision making with a focus on the NICU, highlight different models of decision making, describe the advantages and current limitations of shared decision making, and discuss the ongoing and future challenges of decision making in the NICU amidst medical innovations and emerging technologies.