Browsing by Subject "Periviable delivery"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Feasibility and acceptability of chaplain decision coaching on Periviable resuscitation decision quality: A pilot study
    (Elsevier, 2024-02-21) Varner-Perez, Shelley E.; Hoffman, Shelley M.; Coleman-Phox, Kimberly; Bhamidipalli, Sruthi; Monahan, Patrick O.; Kuppermann, Miriam; Tucker Edmonds, Brownsyne; Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine
    Objective: To pilot test and assess the feasibility and acceptability of chaplain-led decision coaching alongside the GOALS (Getting Optimal Alignment around Life Support) decision support tool to enhance decision-making in threatened periviable delivery. Methods: Pregnant people admitted for threatened periviable delivery and their 'important other' (IO) were enrolled. Decisional conflict, acceptability, and knowledge were measured before and after the intervention. Chaplains journaled their impressions of training and coaching encounters. Descriptive analysis and conventional content analysis were completed. Results: Eight pregnant people and two IOs participated. Decisional conflict decreased by a mean of 6.7 (SD = 9.4) and knowledge increased by a mean of 1.4 (SD = 1.8). All rated their experience as "good" or "excellent," and the amount of information was "just right." Participants found it "helpful to have someone to talk to" and noted chaplains helped them reach a decision. Chaplains found the intervention a valuable use of their time and skillset. Conclusion: This is the first small-scale pilot study to utilize chaplains as decision coaches. Our results suggest that chaplain coaching with a decision support tool is feasible and well-accepted by parents and chaplains. Innovations: Our findings recognize chaplains as an underutilized, yet practical resource in value-laden clinical decision-making.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Perceptions of Options for Mode of Delivery in Periviable Decision-Making
    (2019-07) Bode, Leah; Tucker Edmonds, Brownsyne
    This study sought to qualitatively evaluate women’s perspectives on shared decision-making for mode of delivery (MOD) in the setting of periviable delivery (22-25 weeks), including their understanding of alternatives, risks/benefits, and provider recommendations. Interviews were conducted with women hospitalized for a threatened periviable delivery. We explored decision-making prompts related to MOD. Participants were also prompted to discuss their understanding of MOD risks/benefits and provider recommendations. Interviews were coded and analyzed using NVivo 12. Two-thirds of participants explicitly acknowledged having the option of cesarean section (CS) or vaginal delivery (VD). Maternal comorbidities limited some to one option. Many expressed a particular MOD preference, but most ultimately wanted “whatever’s best for baby.” Conceptually, MOD preference and decision-making were distinct, but typically aligned. However, occasionally, women recognized a MOD choice, but did not perceive the decision to be theirs, and vice versa. Likewise, consent was a separate concept, as some gave consent but did not feel they made a/the MOD decision. Understanding of MOD risks was mostly limited to bleeding, infection or fetal harm. Nine participants did not discuss any risks/benefits. Most women did not describe classical cesarean or risk to future pregnancies as risks. Patients felt that physicians recommended CS for fetal distress and to avoid risk of VD, though both CS and VD were equally recommended overall. Findings revealed a need for providers to clarify options and decision-making roles; review risks more comprehensively; refine recommendations; and create shared MOD plans in periviable counseling to aid women in informed, shared MOD decision-making.