Healthcare professionals' views on two computer-based decision aids for women choosing mode of delivery after previous caesarean section: A qualitative study

BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 116, Issue 7, 2009, Pages 906-914

  Rees, K M ^a   Shaw, A R G ^a   Bennert, K ^a   Emmett, C L ^a   Montgomery, A A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Caesarean section; Decision aids; Focus groups; qualitative study; Vaginal birth after caesarean

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CESAREAN SECTION; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; FEMALE; FIRST TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; VAGINAL DELIVERY;

ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; CESAREAN SECTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREGNANCY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; VAGINAL BIRTH AFTER CESAREAN;

EID: 65549090072     PISSN: 14700328     EISSN: 14710528     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2009.02121.x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Royal College of Midwives. Vision 2000. London : RCM, 2000.
2. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Clinical Standards: Advice on Planning the Service in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. London : RCOG Press, 2002.
3. National Institute of Clinical Excellence. Caesarean Section: Clinical Guideline 13. London : National Institute of Clinical Excellence, 2004.
4. Lucas A. Information for women after CS: are they getting enough? RCM Midwives 2004 7 : 472 5.
5. Moffat M, Bell J, Porter M, Lawton S, Hundley V, Danielian P, et al. Decision making about mode of delivery among pregnant women who have previously had a caesarean section: a qualitative study. BJOG 2007 114 : 86 93.
6. Emmett C, Shaw A, Montgomery A, Murphy D on behalf of the DiAMOND study group. Women's experience of decision making about mode of delivery after a previous caesarean section: the role of health professionals and information about health risks. BJOG 2006 113 : 1438 45.
7. O'Connor AM, Stacy D, Entwistle V, Llewellyn-Thomas HA, Rovner D, Holmes-Rovner M, et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003 1 : CD001431.
8. Montgomery AA, Emmett CL, Fahey T, Jones C, Ricketts IW, Patel RR, et al. Two decision aids for mode of delivery among women with previous caesarean section: randomised controlled trial. Br Med J 2007 334 : 1305 12.
9. Silvia K, Ozanne E, Sepucha K. Implementing breast cancer decision aids in community sites: barriers and resources. Health Expect 2008 11 : 46 53.
10. Stapleton H, Kirkham M, Thomas G. Qualitative study of evidence based leaflets to promote informed choice in maternity care. Br Med J 2002 324 : 639 43.
11. O'Donnell S, Cranney A, Jacobsen MJ, Graham ID, O'Connor AM, Tugwell P. Understanding and overcoming the barriers of implementing patient decision aids in clinical practice. J Eval Clin Pract 2006 12 : 174 81. (Pubitemid 43384614)
12. O'Cathain A, Thomas KJ. Evaluating decision aids - where next? Health Expect 2004 7 : 98 103. (Pubitemid 38661164)
13. Rapport F, Iredale R, Jones W, Sivell S, Edwards A, Gray J, et al. Decision aids for familial breast cancer: exploring women's views using focus groups. Health Expect 2006 9 : 232 44.
14. Graham ID, Logan J, Bennett C, Presseau J, O'Connor A, Mitchell S, et al. Physicians' intentions and use of three patient decision aids. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2007 7 : 20 30.
15. Graham ID, Logan J, O'Connor A, Weeks KE, Aaron S, Cranney A, et al. A qualitative study of physicians' perceptions of three decision aids. Patient Educ Couns 2003 50 : 279 83. (Pubitemid 36945301)
16. Patton M. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park, CA : Sage, 1990.
17. Kitzinger J. Qualitative research: introducing focus groups. BMJ 1995 311 : 299 302.
18. Stewart DW, Shamdassani PN. Focus Groups: Theory and Practice. Newbury Park, CA : Sage, 1990.
19. Kruger RA. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research, 3rd edn. London : Sage, 2000.
20. Strauss AL, Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, 2nd edn. London : Sage, 1998.
21. Fielding N. Analysing qualitative data by computer. Social Research Update, Guildford, UK : University of Surrey, 1993 [ http://www.soc.surrey.ac. uk/sru/SRU1.html ]. Accessed 4 November 2006.
22. Forrest Keenan K, van Teijlingen E, Pitchforth E. The analysis of qualitative research data in family planning and reproductive health care. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2005 31 : 40 3. (Pubitemid 40127831)
23. Emmett CL, Murphy DJ, Patel RR, Fahey T, Jones C, Ricketts IW, et al. Decision making about mode of delivery after previous caesarean section: development and piloting of two computer-based decision aids. Health Expect 2007 10 : 161 72. (Pubitemid 46808891)
24. Kamal P, Dixon-Woods M, Kurinczuk JJ, Oppenheimer C, Squire P, Waugh J. Factors influencing repeat caesarean section: qualitative exploratory study of obstetricians' and midwives' accounts. BJOG 2005 112 : 1054 60. (Pubitemid 41632658)
25. Shorten A, Shorten B, Keogh J, West S, Morris J. Making choices for childbirth: a randomisized controlled trial of a decision-aid for informed birth after caesarean. Birth 2005 32 : 252 61.
26. van Teijlingen E, Forrest Keenan K. The range of qualitative research methods in family planning and reproductive health care. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2004 30 : 171 3.
27. Morgan DL. Focus Groups as Qualitative Research. London : Sage, 1988.
28. Montgomery AA, Fahey T. How do patients' treatment preferences compare with those of clinicians? Qual Health Care 2001 10 (Suppl 1 i39 43. (Pubitemid 32844127)
29. Holmes-Rovner M, Valade D, Orlowski C, Draus C, Valerio-Nabornzy B, Keiser S. Implementing shared decision making in routine practice: barriers and opportunities. Health Expect 2000 3 : 182 91. (Pubitemid 30646742)