Ethical implications of the use of decision aids for antenatal counseling at the limits of gestational viability

Smartphone-Based Video Antenatal Preterm Birth Education: The Preemie Prep for Parents Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Preterm birth is a leading cause of infant mortality and child morbidity. Preterm birth is not always unexpected, yet standard prenatal care does not offer anticipatory education to parents at risk of delivering preterm, which leaves parents unprepared to make health care choices during the pregnancy that can improve survival and decrease morbidity in case of preterm birth.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of the Preemie Prep for Parents (P3) program on maternal knowledge of preterm birth, preparation for decision-making, and anxiety.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Recruitment for this randomized clinical trial conducted at a US academic medical center took place from February 3, 2020, to April 12, 2021. A total of 120 pregnant persons with a risk factor for preterm birth were enrolled between 16 and 21 weeks' gestational age and followed up through pregnancy completion.

Intervention

Starting at 18 weeks' gestational age, P3 program participants received links delivered via text message to 51 gestational age-specific short animated videos. Control participants received links to patient education webpages from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

Main Outcomes and Measures

At 25 weeks' gestation, scores on the Parent Prematurity Knowledge Questionnaire (scored as percent correct), Preparation for Decision Making Scale (scored 0-100), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Anxiety computerized adaptive test. Analysis was based on an intention to treat.

Results

A total of 120 pregnant participants (mean [SD] age, 32.5 [4.9] years) were included in the study; 60 participants were randomized to each group. Participants in the P3 group scored higher than those in the control group on knowledge of long-term outcomes at 25 weeks (88.5% vs 73.2%; estimated difference, 15.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 8.3-22.5 percentage points; P < .001). Participants in the P3 group reported being significantly more prepared than did participants in the control group for neonatal resuscitation decision-making at 25 weeks (Preparation for Decision Making Scale score, 76.0 vs 52.3; difference, 23.7; 95% CI, 14.1-33.2). There was no difference between the P3 group and the control group in anxiety at 25 weeks (mean [SE] PROMIS Anxiety scores, 53.8 [1.1] vs 54.0 [1.1]; difference, -0.1; 95% CI, -3.2 to 2.9).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, pregnant persons randomly assigned to the P3 program had more knowledge of core competencies and were more prepared to make decisions that affect maternal and infant health, without experiencing worse anxiety. Mobile antenatal preterm birth education may provide a unique benefit to parents with preterm birth risk factors.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04093492.

Digital decision aid for prenatal counseling in imminent extreme premature labor: development and pilot testing

Background

In case of extreme premature delivery at 24 weeks of gestation, both early intensive care and palliative comfort care for the neonate are considered treatment options. Prenatal counseling, preferably using shared decision making, is needed to agree on the treatment option in case labor progresses. This article described the development of a digital decision aid (DA) to support pregnant women, partners and clinicians in prenatal counseling for imminent extreme premature labor.

Methods

This DA is developed following the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. The Dutch treatment guideline and the Dutch recommendations for prenatal counseling in extreme prematurity were used as basis. Development of the first prototype was done by expert clinicians and patients, further improvements were done after alpha testing with involved clinicians, patients and other experts (n = 12), and beta testing with non-involved clinicians and patients (n = 15).

Results

The final version includes information, probabilities and figures depending on users’ preferences. Furthermore, it elicits patient values and provides guidance to aid parents and professionals in making a decision for either early intensive care or palliative comfort care in threatening extreme premature delivery.

Conclusion

A decision aid was developed to support prenatal counseling regarding the decision on early intensive care versus palliative comfort care in case of extreme premature delivery at 24 weeks gestation. It was well accepted by parents and healthcare professionals. Our multimedia, digital DA is openly available online to support prenatal counseling and personalized, shared decision-making in imminent extreme premature labor.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-021-01735-z.

Neonatologists' Resuscitation Decisions at Birth for Extremely Premature Infants. A Belgian Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

Deciding whether initiating or withholding resuscitation at birth for extremely preterm infants (EPIs) can be difficult due to uncertainty on outcomes. Clinical uncertainty generates ethical uncertainty. Thus, physicians' attitudes and perspectives on resuscitation of EPIs might influence resuscitation decisions. We aimed at understanding how neonatologists make clinical-ethical decisions for EPI resuscitation and how they perceive these decisions.

METHODS

We performed a qualitative study using a constructivist account of grounded theory. Face-to-face, semi-structured in-depth interviews with neonatologists comprised data collection. For data analysis, we used the Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven.

RESULTS

We interviewed 20 neonatologists working in 10 hospitals in Belgium. Participants' decision-making can be described as consensus-based, gestational age-based, contextualized, progressive, and shared. All participants agreed on the importance of using the consensus expressed in guidelines as a guidance for the decision-making, i.e., consensus-based. Consequently, all 20 participants use GA thresholds indicated in the guidelines, i.e., GA-based. However, they use these thresholds differently in their decisions. Few participants rigidly follow established thresholds. The vast majority reported using additional contextual factors as birthweight or parents' wishes in the decision-making, rather than only the EPIs' GA, i.e., contextualized. All participants agreed on the importance of involving the parents in the decision-making, i.e., shared, and indeed parents' wishes were among the most valued factors considered in the decision-making. However, the extent to which parents were involved in the decision-making depended on the infant's GA. Participants described a gray zone in which parents' were viewed as the main decision-makers due to the high clinical uncertainty. This mean that participants tend to follow parents' request even when they disagree with it. Outside the gray zone, physicians were viewed as the main decision-makers. This mean that, although parents' wishes were still considered, counseling was more directive and the final decision was made by the physician.

CONCLUSION

Although an EPI's GA remains the main factor guiding neonatologists' resuscitation decisions, other factors are seriously considered in the decision-making process. All neonatologist participants agreed on the importance of involving parents in the decision-making. However, they involve parents differently depending on the EPI's GA.

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.

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.

Neonatology in Austria: ethics to improve practice

In the world of Austrian neonatal intensive care units, the role of ethics is recognized only partially. The normatively tense cases that are at the backdrop of this essay concern the situations around the limit of viability (weeks 22 + 0 days to 25 + 6 days of gestation), which is the point in the development of an extremely preterm infant at which there are chances of extra-uterine survival. This essay first outlines the key explicit ethical challenges that are mainly concerned with notions of uncertainty and best interest. Then, it attempts to elucidate the less explicit ethical challenges related to the notion of nudging in the neonatal practice and argue that the role of ethics needs to be recognized more—with the focus on the role of virtue ethics—in order to improve the practice of neonatal medicine.

Ethics of resuscitation for extremely premature infants: a systematic review of argument-based literature

OBJECTIVE

To present (1) the ethical concepts related to the debate on resuscitation of extremely premature infants (EPIs) as they are described in the ethical literature; and (2) the ethical arguments based on these concepts.

DESIGN

We conducted a systematic review of the ethical literature. We selected articles based on the following predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria: (1) English language articles (2) presenting fully elaborated ethical arguments (3) on resuscitation (4) of EPIs, that is, infants born before 28 weeks of gestation.

ANALYSIS

After repeated reading of articles, we developed individual summaries, conceptual schemes and an overall conceptual scheme. Ethical arguments and concepts were identified and analysed.

RESULTS

Forty articles were included out of 4709 screened. Personhood, best interest, autonomy and justice were concepts grounding the various arguments. Regarding these concepts, included authors agreed that the best interest principle should guide resuscitation decisions, whereas justice seemed the least important concept. The arguments addressed two questions: Should we resuscitate EPIs? Who should decide? Included authors agreed that not all EPIs should be resuscitated but disagreed on what criteria should ground this decision. Overall, included authors agreed that both parents and physicians should contribute to the decision.

CONCLUSIONS

The included publications suggest that while the best interest is the main concept guiding resuscitation decisions, justice is the least important. The included authors also agree that both parents and physicians should be actively involved in resuscitation decisions for EPIs. However, our results suggest that parents' decision should be over-ridden when in contrast with the EPI's best interest.

Creation of a Decision Support Tool for Expectant Parents Facing Threatened Periviable Delivery: Application of a User-Centered Design Approach

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) is optimal in the context of periviable delivery, where the decision to pursue life-support measures or palliation is both preference sensitive and value laden. We sought to develop a decision support tool (DST) prototype to facilitate SDM by utilizing a user-centered design research approach.

METHODS

We convened four patient and provider advisory boards with women and their partners who had experienced a surviving or non-surviving periviable delivery, pregnant women who had not experienced a prior preterm birth, and obstetric providers. Each 2-h session involved design research activities to generate ideas and facilitate sharing of values, goals, and attitudes. Participant feedback shaped the design of three prototypes (a tablet application, family story videos, and a virtual reality experience) to be tested in a final session.

RESULTS

Ninety-five individuals (48 mothers/partners; 47 providers) from two hospitals participated. Most participants agreed that the prototypes should include factual, unbiased outcomes and probabilities. Mothers and support partners also desired comprehensive explanations of delivery and care options, while providers wanted a tool to ease communication, help elicit values, and share patient experiences. Participants ultimately favored the tablet application and suggested that it include family testimonial videos.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that a DST that combines unbiased information and understandable outcomes with family testimonials would be meaningful for periviable SDM. User-centered design was found to be a useful method for creating a DST prototype that may lead to improved effectiveness, usability, uptake, and dissemination in the future, by leveraging the expertise of a wide range of stakeholders.

Qualitative evaluation of a guideline supporting shared decision making for extreme preterm birth

Background and objectives: The decision to attempt resuscitation or provide palliative care at birth for extremely preterm infants between 22 and 25 weeks remains complex. The purpose of this study was to identify facilitators and barriers to implementation of a clinical practice guideline developed to support shared decision-making for these cases.Methods: A purposeful sample of healthcare providers, involved in the care of one of five cases of anticipated extremely preterm birth, was recruited for interviews. Participants shared their views on the guideline content, implementation process, and facilitators and barriers encountered. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative content analysis was used to code, categorize, and thematically describe the data. The Knowledge-Attitudes-Behaviours framework was used to organize the findings.Results: Twenty-five key informants (16 physicians, nine nurses) were interviewed. Participants described varying levels of knowledge of the guideline. Facilitators to implementation included: (1) an awareness of, familiarity with and belief in the content; (2) hard copy and electronic guideline accessibility; and, (3) institutional expertise to provide necessary care. Barriers included: (1) minimal awareness or familiarity with the content; (2) lack of agreement with the recommendations; (3) inadequate evidence and applicability to support changes in practice; and, (4) lack of resources to care for the most immature infants.Conclusions: Identified facilitators and barriers will inform the development of tailored strategies for improved local and future broader implementation. Other institutions can use the results to facilitate implementation of their guidelines on this ethically charged area.