BMJ  2007;334:1305 (23 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.39217.671019.55 (published 31 May 2007)

Research

Two decision aids for mode of delivery among women with previous caesarean section: randomised controlled trial

¹ Department of Community Based Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2AA, ² Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Mercer's Medical Centre, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland, and Tayside Centre for General Practice, University of Dundee, Dundee, ³ School of Computing, University of Dundee, Queen Mother Building, Dundee, ⁴ Academic Unit of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Bristol, St Michael's Hospital, Bristol, ⁵ Academic Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Trinity College Dublin, Coombe Women's Hospital, Dublin 8, Republic of Ireland, and Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee

Objectives To determine the effects of two computer based decision aids on decisional conflict and mode of delivery among pregnant women with a previous caesarean section.

Design Randomised trial, conducted from May 2004 to August 2006.

Setting Four maternity units in south west England, and Scotland.

Participants 742 pregnant women with one previous lower segment caesarean section and delivery expected at 37 weeks. Non-English speakers were excluded.

Interventions Usual care: standard care given by obstetric and midwifery staff. Information programme: women navigated through descriptions and probabilities of clinical outcomes for mother and baby associated with planned vaginal birth, elective caesarean section, and emergency caesarean section. Decision analysis: mode of delivery was recommended based on utility assessments performed by the woman combined with probabilities of clinical outcomes within a concealed decision tree. Both interventions were delivered via a laptop computer after brief instructions from a researcher.

Main outcome measures Total score on decisional conflict scale, and mode of delivery.

Results Women in the information programme (adjusted difference –6.2, 95% confidence interval –8.7 to –3.7) and the decision analysis (–4.0, –6.5 to –1.5) groups had reduced decisional conflict compared with women in the usual care group. The rate of vaginal birth was higher for women in the decision analysis group compared with the usual care group (37% v 30%, adjusted odds ratio 1.42, 0.94 to 2.14), but the rates were similar in the information programme and usual care groups.

Conclusions Decision aids can help women who have had a previous caesarean section to decide on mode of delivery in a subsequent pregnancy. The decision analysis approach might substantially affect national rates of caesarean section.

Trial Registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN84367722 [controlled-trials.com] .

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

A complication after a previous caesarean section

Niamh Barrett, Sharon R Sheehan, and Deirdre J Murphy
BMJ 2009 339: b2979. [Extract] [Full Text]

Vaginal birth after a caesarean is not always beneficial

Paul T-Y Ayuk
BMJ 2007 335: 7. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Evidence to inform

Fiona Godlee
BMJ 2007 334: 0. [Extract] [Full Text]

Decision aids for women with a previous caesarean section

Jeremy A Lauer and Ana P Betrán
BMJ 2007 334: 1281-1282. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process

Glyn Elwyn, Annette O'Connor, Dawn Stacey, Robert Volk, Adrian Edwards, Angela Coulter, Richard Thomson, Alexandra Barratt, Michael Barry, Steven Bernstein, Phyllis Butow, Aileen Clarke, Vikki Entwistle, Deb Feldman-Stewart, Margaret Holmes-Rovner, Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas, Nora Moumjid, Al Mulley, Cornelia Ruland, Karen Sepucha, Alan Sykes, Tim Whelan The International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration
BMJ 2006 333: 417. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures

Adrian Edwards, Glyn Elwyn, and Al Mulley
BMJ 2002 324: 827-830. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Paternalism or partnership?

Angela Coulter
BMJ 1999 319: 719-720. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

What do we mean by partnership in making decisions about treatment?

Cathy Charles, Tim Whelan, and Amiram Gafni
BMJ 1999 319: 780-782. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Barrett, N., Sheehan, S. R, Murphy, D. J (2009). A complication after a previous caesarean section. BMJ 339: b2979-b2979 [Full text]  
• Legare, F., Dodin, S., Stacey, D., LeBlanc, A., Tapp, S. (2008). Patient decision aid on natural health products for menopausal symptoms: randomized controlled trial. Menopause Int 14: 105-110 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Pignone, M. (2007). Incorporating Decision Analysis in Decision Aids. Med Decis Making 27: 547-549  
• (2007). Computers Can Clarify VBAC Decisions. JWatch Women's Health 2007: 3-3 [Full text]  
• Ayuk, P. T-Y (2007). Vaginal birth after a caesarean is not always beneficial. BMJ 335: 7-7 [Full text]  
• Lauer, J. A, Betran, A. P (2007). Decision aids for women with a previous caesarean section. BMJ 334: 1281-1282 [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Vaginal birth after caesarean section is not necessarily beneficial

Paul T-Y Ayuk
bmj.com, 26 Jun 2007 [Full text]

Are these results, statistically significant?

Preetham Kodumuri
bmj.com, 28 Jun 2007 [Full text]

Effects of unblinding

Emuobonuvie J Emoghware
bmj.com, 29 Jun 2007 [Full text]

Ethical issues of consent

Suryanarayana Kakkilaya, et al.
bmj.com, 29 Jun 2007 [Full text]

Online poll

Find out more on doc2doc >>