Implementation of a novel shared decision-making intervention in women with chronic hypertension in pregnancy: multiple-site multiple-method investigation.

BACKGROUND: Many women with chronic hypertension are conflicted about antihypertensive medication during pregnancy and some are non-adherent to prescribed medication. OBJECTIVES: Codesign, implement and evaluate a novel shared decision-making (SDM) intervention for use with pregnant women with chronic hypertension. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women with chronic hypertension and their principal healthcare professionals (obstetricians, midwives, and physicians), at three National Health Service hospital trusts with different models of care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The RE-AIM framework guided the evaluation. Primary: Decisional conflict scale, medication intention survey and women's acceptability. Secondary: Healthcare professionals' acceptability and the barriers and facilitators to SDM implementation with pregnant women with chronic hypertension. RESULTS: Fifty women participated. Nearly half (46 %; n = 23) of women were from Black and Asian backgrounds. The SDM intervention was effective at reducing decisional conflict (mean reduction from baseline 42 %, 95 % CI 35-49, p ≤ 0.05). In 36 women (72 %), the reduction was of clinical importance. 24 women (48 %) were uncertain about or planned not to take antihypertensives prior to the SDM intervention, compared to two women (4 %) after the intervention. The intervention was acceptable to women and healthcare professionals. 10 of 14 healthcare professionals felt that the in-consultation aid facilitated SDM in current antenatal contexts, a similar proportion (10/14) felt the length of consultations hindered SDM. CONCLUSION: A novel codesigned SDM intervention reduced decisional conflict and increased women's intention to take antihypertensive agents during pregnancy. This intervention could be adopted into practice for women making pregnancy decisions where there is uncertainty around the medication management option.

The effectiveness of decision aids for pregnancy related decision-making in women with pre-pregnancy morbidity; systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Women with pre-existing morbidity arising from medical conditions or previous caesarean section are at higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes compared to women without such morbidity. Women often face complex pregnancy-related decision-making that may be characterized by conflicting maternal and perinatal priorities. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess randomised controlled trials of decision aids to evaluate whether they are effective at reducing decisional conflict scores and to evaluate what type of decision aids are most effective for women with pre-existing morbidity in pregnancy. METHODS: We searched Medline (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO) from the earliest entries until September 2021. We selected randomised controlled trials comparing patient decision aids for women with pre-existing morbidity with usual clinical practice or a control intervention. Study characteristics and Jadad risk of bias was recorded. Meta-analysis by pre-existing morbidity type was performed using Stata 17 and the data was presented with a Forest Plot. Random effects models were used to calculate summary estimates if there was substantial clinical or statistical heterogeneity and post mean DCS scores were described in a sensitivity analysis and presented as a line graph, to improve clinical interpretation of results.. A narrative synthesis of the selected studies evaluated what type of decision aid works and for in what circumstances. RESULTS: Ten randomised controlled trials, which reported data from 4028 women, were included. Patient decision aids were evaluated in women with pre-existing morbidity who were undertaking pregnancy-related decision-making. Patient decision aids reduced decisional conflict scale scores by an additional - 3.7, 95% Confidence Interval - 5.9% to - 1.6%) compared to the control group. Women with pre-existing medical conditions were more conflicted at baseline and had greater reductions in decisional conflict scale score (mean difference vs. control group: - 6.6%; 95% CI - 9.8% to - 3.3%), in contrast to those with previous caesarean section (mean difference - 2.4%; 95% CI - 4.8% to - 0.1%). There was limited evidence on the effect of decision aids on health outcomes. Decision aids reduced unwanted variation in decision-making support across maternity settings. CONCLUSION: Patient decision aids are effective tools to support personalised care planning and informed decision-making in women with pre-existing morbidity. Women with pre-existing medical morbidity were more conflicted at baseline and were more likely to benefit from decision aids. Adoption of aids in this population may lead to improve adherence and health outcomes, warranting further research.

Implementation of national antenatal hypertension guidelines: a multicentre multiple methods study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the implementation of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence antenatal hypertension guidelines, to identify strategies to reduce incidences of severe hypertension and associated maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality in pregnant women with chronic hypertension. METHODS: We used a multiple method multisite approach to establish implementation of guidelines and the associated barriers and facilitators. We used a national survey of healthcare professionals (n=97), case notes review (n=55) and structured observations (n=42) to assess implementation. The barriers and facilitators to implementation were identified from semistructured qualitative interviews with healthcare professionals (n=13) and pregnant women (n=18) using inductive thematic analysis. The findings were integrated and evaluated using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Pregnant women with chronic hypertension and their principal carers (obstetricians, midwives and physicians), at three National Health Service hospital trusts with different models of care. RESULTS: We found severe hypertension to be prevalent (46% of case notes reviewed) and target blood pressure practices to be suboptimal (56% of women had an antenatal blood pressure target documented). Women were infrequently given information (52%) or offered choice (19%) regarding antihypertensives. Women (14/18) reported internal conflict in taking antihypertensives and non-adherence was prevalent (8/18). Women who were concordant with treatment recommendations described having mutual trust with professionals mediated through appropriate information, side effect management and involvement in decision making. Professionals reported needing updates and tools for target blood pressure setting and shared decision making underpinned by antihypertensive safety and effectiveness research. CONCLUSIONS: Women's non-adherence to antihypertensives is higher than anticipated. Suboptimal information provision around treatment, choice of antihypertensives and target setting practices by healthcare professionals may be contributory. Understanding the reasons for non-adherence will inform education and decision-making strategies needed to address both clinician and women's behaviour. Further research into the effectiveness and long-term safety of common antihypertensives is also required.

Research priorities for pregnancy hypertension: a UK priority setting partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

OBJECTIVES: To identify research priorities for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy from individuals with lived experience and healthcare professionals. DESIGN: Prospective surveys and consensus meetings using principles outlined by the James Lind Alliance. SETTING: UK. METHODS: A steering group was established and 'uncertainties' were gathered using an online survey and literature search. An interim online survey ranked long-listed questions and the top 10 research questions were reached by consensus at a final prioritisation workshop. PARTICIPANTS: Women, partners, relatives and friends of those with lived experience of pregnancy hypertension, researchers and healthcare professionals. RESULTS: The initial online survey was answered by 278 participants (180 women with lived experience, 9 partners/relatives/friends, 71 healthcare professionals and 18 researchers). Together with a literature search, this identified 764 questions which were refined into 50 summary questions. All summary questions were presented in an interim prioritisation survey that was answered by 155 participants (87 women with lived experience, 4 partners/relatives/friends, 49 healthcare professionals and 15 researchers). The top 25 highest ranked questions were considered by the final prioritisation workshop. The top 10 uncertainties were identified by consensus and ranked as follows in order of priority: long-term consequences of pregnancy hypertension (for the woman and baby), short-term complications of pregnancy hypertension (for the woman and baby), screening tests for pre-eclampsia, prevention of long-term problems (for the woman and baby), causes of pregnancy hypertension, prevention of recurrent pregnancy hypertension, educational needs of healthcare professionals, diagnosis of pre-eclampsia, management of pregnancy hypertension, provision of support for women and families. CONCLUSIONS: Research priorities shared by those with lived experience of pregnancy hypertension and healthcare professionals have been identified. Researchers should use these to inform the choice of future studies in this area.