Patient education and counseling · 2021
Patient and provider perspectives on preterm birth risk assessment and communication.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tesfalul Martha A, Feuer Sky K, Castillo Esperanza, Coleman-Phox Kimberly, O'Leary Allison, Kuppermann Miriam
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To describe and compare how obstetric patients and care providers view preterm birth risk assessment and communication.
METHODS: We conducted eight focus groups with obstetric patients (n = 35) and 16 qualitative interviews with obstetric providers. Grounded theory was used to identify and analyze themes.
RESULTS: Patients' knowledge about preterm birth varied greatly. Similar benefits and risks of preterm birth risk counseling were discussed by patients and providers with notable exceptions: patients cited preparedness as a benefit and providers cited maternal blame, patient alienation, and estimate uncertainty as potential risks. Most patients expressed a desire to know their personalized preterm birth risk during pregnancy. Providers differed in whether they offer universal versus selective, and quantitative versus qualitative, preterm birth risk counseling. Many providers expressed concern about discussing social and structural risk factors for preterm birth.
CONCLUSION: While many patients desired knowing their personalized preterm birth risk, prenatal care providers' disclosure practices vary because of uncertainty of estimates, concerns about negative consequences and challenges of addressing systemic inequities and social determinants of health.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Given the existing asymmetry of information about preterm birth risk, providers should consider patient preferences regarding and potential benefits and risks of such disclosure in their practice.
METHODS: We conducted eight focus groups with obstetric patients (n = 35) and 16 qualitative interviews with obstetric providers. Grounded theory was used to identify and analyze themes.
RESULTS: Patients' knowledge about preterm birth varied greatly. Similar benefits and risks of preterm birth risk counseling were discussed by patients and providers with notable exceptions: patients cited preparedness as a benefit and providers cited maternal blame, patient alienation, and estimate uncertainty as potential risks. Most patients expressed a desire to know their personalized preterm birth risk during pregnancy. Providers differed in whether they offer universal versus selective, and quantitative versus qualitative, preterm birth risk counseling. Many providers expressed concern about discussing social and structural risk factors for preterm birth.
CONCLUSION: While many patients desired knowing their personalized preterm birth risk, prenatal care providers' disclosure practices vary because of uncertainty of estimates, concerns about negative consequences and challenges of addressing systemic inequities and social determinants of health.
PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Given the existing asymmetry of information about preterm birth risk, providers should consider patient preferences regarding and potential benefits and risks of such disclosure in their practice.