The use of projected autonomy in antenatal shared decision-making for periviable neonates: a qualitative study

Maternal Health, Neonatology and Perinatology - Tập 9 Số 1
Megan J. Thorvilson1, Katherine Carroll2, Bethany D. Kaemingk1,3,4,5, Karen Schaepe6, Christopher A. Collura1,5
1Department of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
2School of Sociology, College of Arts and Social Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
3Department of Pediatrics, Sanford Children’s Hospital, Fargo, USA
4Department of Pediatrics, University of North Dakota, Grand Forks, USA
5Division of Neonatal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA
6Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, USA

Tóm tắt

Abstract Background In this study, we assessed the communication strategies used by neonatologists in antenatal consultations which may influence decision-making when determining whether to provide resuscitation or comfort measures only in the care of periviable neonates. Methods This study employed a qualitative study design using inductive thematic discourse analysis of ‘naturally occurring data’ in the form of antenatal conversations around resuscitation decisions at the grey zone of viability. The study occurred between February 2017 and June 2018 on a labor and delivery unit within a large Midwestern tertiary care hospital. Participants included 25 mothers who were admitted to the study hospital with anticipated delivery in the grey zone of viability and practicing neonatologists or neonatology fellows who partnered in antenatal consultation. We used a two-stage inductive analytic process to focus on how neonatologists’ discourses constructed SDM in antenatal consultations. First, we used a thematic discourse analysis to interpret the recurring patterns of meaning within the transcribed antenatal consultations, and second, we theorized the subsequent effects of these discourses on shaping the context of SDM in antenatal encounters. Results In this qualitative study, that included discourse analysis of real-time audio conversations in 25 antenatal consults, neonatologists used language that creates projected autonomy through (i) descriptions of fetal physiology (ii) development of the fetus’s presence, and (iii) fetal role in decision-making. Conclusion Discourse analysis of real-time audio conversations in antenatal consultations was revelatory of how various discursive patterns brought the fetus into decision-making, thus changing who is considered the key actor in SDM.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Raju TNK, Mercer BM, Burchfield D, Joseph GF. Periviable birth: executive summary of a joint workshop by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, American Academy of Pediatrics, and American College of Obstetricians and gynecologists. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210(5):406–17.

Cummings J, Watterberg K, Eichenwald E, et al. Antenatal Counseling regarding resuscitation and Intensive Care before 25 weeks of Gestation. Pediatrics. 2015;136(3):588–95.

Obstetric Care Consensus No. Periviable Birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;6(4):e187–99.

Sullivan A, Cummings C. Historical perspective: Shared decision making in the NICU. NeoReviews. 2020;21(4):e217–25.

Soltys F, Philpott-Streiff SE, Fuzzell L, Politi MC. Importance of Shared decision-making in the neonatal Intensive Care Unit. J Perinatol. 2020;40(3):504–9.

Beauchamp T, Childress J. Principles of Biomedical Ethics: marking its Fortieth Anniversary. Am J Bioeth. 2019;19(11):9–12.

American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Fetus and Newborns, Bell EF. Noninitiation or withdrawal of intensive care for high-risk newborns. Pediatrics. 2007;119(2):401–3.

Carter BS, Leuthner SR. Decision making in the NICU – strategies, statistics, and satisficing. Bioeth Forum. 2002;18(3–4):7–15.

Boss RD, Hutton N, Donohue PK, Arnold RM. Neonatologist training to guide family decision making for critically ill infants. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163(9):783–8.

Rosenbaum L. The Paternalism preference – choosing unshared decision making. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(7):589–92.

Lantos JD. Ethical problems in decision making in the neonatal ICU. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(19):1851–60.

Singh J, Fanaroff J, Andrews B, et al. Resuscitation in the gray zone of viability: determining physician preferences and predicting infant outcomes. Pediatrics. 2007;120(3):519–26.

Bastek TK, Richardson DK, Zupancic JAF, Burns JP. Prenatal consultation practices at the border of viability: a regional survey. Pediatrics. 2005;116(2):407–13.

Rhodes R, Holzman IR. Is the best interest standard good for pediatrics? Pediatrics. 2014;134(Suppl 2):121–9.

Rysavy MA, Li L, Bell EF, et al. Between-hospital variation in treatment and outcomes in extremely Preterm infants. N Engl J Med. 2015;327:1801–11.

Patel RM, Rysavy MA, Bell EF, Tyson JE. Survival of infants born at Periviable Gestational ages. Clin Perinatol. 2017;44(2):287–303.

Hodgson Kim B, Feltman DM, Schneider S et al. What information do clinicians deem important for counseling parents facing extremely early deliveries? Results from an online survey [published online June 7, 2021]. Am J Perinatol. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1730430.

Weil W Jr. Abandoning informed consent? Hastings Cent Rep. 1996;26(1):3–4.

Walter JK, Hwang J, Fiks AG. Pragmatic strategies for Shared decision-making. Pediatrics. 2018;142(Suppl 3):157–S162.

Haward MF, Janvier A, Lorenz JM, Fischhoff B. Counseling parents at risk of delivery of an extremely premature infant: differing strategies. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017;8(4):243–52.

Cavolo A, Dierckx de Casterlé B, Naulaers G, Gastmans C. Neonatologists’ decision-making for resuscitation and non-resuscitation of extremely preterm infants: ethical principles, challenges, and strategies—a qualitative study. BMC Med Ethics. 2021;22(1):129–43.

Kukora SK, Boss RD. Values-based shared decision-making in the antenatal period. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018;23(1):17–24.

Janvier A, Barrington K, Farlow B. Communication with parents concerning withholding or withdrawing of life-sustaining interventions in neonatology. Semin Perinatol. 2014;38(1):38–46.

Shapiro N, Wachtel EV, Bailey SM, Espiritu MM. Implicit physician biases in Periviability Counseling. J Pediatr. 2018;197:109–15.

Haward MF, Murphy RO, Lorenz JM. Message framing and perinatal decisions. Pediatrics. 2008;122(1):109–18.

Janvier A, Leblanc I, Barrington KJ. The best-interest standard is not applied for neonatal resuscitation decisions. Pediatrics. 2008;121(5):963–9.

Perikyma A, Ruusuvuori J. Analysing talk and text. In: Denzin N, Lincoln Y, editors. The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. 4th ed. SAGE Publications Inc; 2011. pp. 529–43.

Silverman D. Doing qualitative research. 2nd ed. London: SAGE; 2005.

Holsteiin J, Gubrium J. The Active Interview. In: Silverman D,. Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice SAGE; 2004:140-161.30. Kaemingk BD, Carroll K, Thorvilson MJ, Schaepe KS, Collura CA. Uncertainty at the Limits of Viability: A Qualitative Study of Antenatal Consultations. Pediatrics 2021;147(4):e20201865.

Kaemingk BD, Carroll K, Thorvilson MJ, Schaepe KS, Collura CA (2021) Uncertainty at the Limits of Viability: A Qualitative Study of Antenatal Consultations. Pediatrics 147(4):e20201865

Flowerdew J, editor. Discourse in Context: contemporary Applied Linguistics. London: Bloomsbury Publishing; 2014.

Flick U. Using naturally Occurring Data: conversation, discourse and hermeneutic analysis. In: Uwe, Flick, editors. An introduction to qualitative research. SAGE; 2018. pp. 494–518.

Fairclough N. Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. 2nd ed. London: Routledge; 2010.

Lorié ES, Wreesmann WW, van Veenendaal NR, van Kempen AAMW, Labrie NHM. Parents’ needs and perceived gaps in communication with healthcare professionals in the neonatal (intensive) care unit: a qualitative interview study. Patient Educ Couns. 2021;104(7):1518–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2020.12.007.

Griffin T. Family-centered care in the NICU. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2006;20(1):98–102.

Parish O, Williams D, Odd D, Joseph-Williams N. Barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making in neonatal medicine: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of parental perceptions. Patient Educ Couns. 2022;105(5):1101–14.

Carlsson T, Starke V, Mattsson E. The emotional process from diagnosis to birth following a prenatal diagnosis of fetal anomaly: a qualitative study of messages in online discussion boards. Midwifery. 2017;48:53–9.

Rafael-Gutiérrez SS, García PE, Prellezo AS, Paulí LR, Del-Castillo BL, Sánchez RB. Emotional support for parents with premature children admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit: a qualitative phenomenological study. Turk J Pediatr. 2020;62(3):436–49.

Ionio C, Colombo C, Brazzoduro V, et al. Mothers and fathers in NICU: the impact of Preterm Birth on parental distress. Eur J Psychol. 2016;12(4):604–21.

Kharrat A, Moore GP, Beckett S, Nicholls SG, Sampson M, Daboval T. Antenatal consultations at Extreme Prematurity: a systematic review of parent communication needs. J Pediatr. 2018;196:109–115e7.

Geurtzen R, van Heijst A, Draaisma J, et al. Prenatal counseling in extreme prematurity - insight into preferences from experienced parents. Patient Educ Couns. 2019;102(8):1541–9.

Boss RD, Hutton N, Sulpar LJ, West AM, Donohue PK. Values parents apply to decision-making regarding delivery room resuscitation for high-risk newborns. Pediatrics. 2008;122(3):583–9.

Gaucher N, Nadeau S, Barbier A, Payot A. Antenatal consultations for preterm labour: how are future mothers reassured? Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2018;103(1):F36–F42. https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2016-312448.

Young E, Tsai E, O’Riordan A. A qualitative study of predelivery counselling for extreme prematurity. Paediatr Child Health. 2012;17(8):432–6.

Mills M, Cortezzo DE. Moral Distress in the neonatal intensive care unit: what is it, why it happens, and how we can address it. Front Pediatr. 2020;8:581. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2020.00581. Published 2020 Sep 10.

Krick JA, Feltman DM, Arnolds M. Decision-making for extremely Preterm infants: a qualitative systematic review. J Pediatr. 2022;251:6–16.

Syltern J, Ursin L, Solberg B, Støen R. Postponed withholding: balanced decision-making at the margins of viability. Am J Bioeth. 2022;22(11):15–26.

Myers P, Andrews B, Meadow W. Opportunities and difficulties for counseling at the margins of viability. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018;23(1):30–4.

Prentice TM, Janvier A, Gillam L, Donath S, Davis PG. Moral Distress in Neonatology. Pediatrics. 2021;148(2):e2020031864.

Lin M, Sayeed S, DeCourcey DD, Wolfe J, Cummings C. The case for Advance Care Planning in the NICU. Pediatrics. 2022;150(6):e2022057824. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2022-057824.

Aranowitz R. Risky Medicine: our Quest to cure fear and uncertainty. Chicago: The Univesity of Chicago Press; 2015.

Lincoln Y, Guba E. Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park: SAGE; 1985.

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Maternal Health, Neonatology and Perinatology

Tập 9 Số 1

Thông tin tác giả