Motivational Interviewing in Women's Pelvic Wellness Education

March 19, 2019 updated by: Ottawa Hospital Research Institute

2015 Motivational Interviewing in Women's Pelvic Wellness Education Project

This pilot study will assess the feasibility and acceptability of an educational workshop on pelvic floor disorders and its potential impact on decisional conflict.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

Pelvic floor disorders can significantly affect a woman's quality of life, yet many feel uncomfortable openly discussing these topics. Treatments include lifestyle modification, medications, and/or surgery. "Decisional conflict" arises when patients have difficulty choosing between several viable treatment options. Factors contributing to decisional conflict include biased information, poor peer support, and unaddressed fears. Effective counselling may help address these factors.

There are few studies on how decision coaching can help women with prolapse and incontinence reach a satisfactory decision about treatment. This study aims to use the principals of shared decision making to address decisional conflict surrounding treatment for pelvic floor disorders. Specifically, the investigators will evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of small group workshops on pelvic organ prolapse and urinary incontinence led by a nurse continence advisor and a psychologist (decision coach).

Results of this study will inform future development of interdisciplinary, patient-centered approaches to enhanced decision making in women's health.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

80

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Ontario
      • Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1H 7W9
        • The Ottawa Hospital, Riverside Campus

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Women ages >18 years old
  • Urinary incontinence and/or pelvic organ prolapse
  • First visit with urogynecologist

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Anal incontinence
  • Previous pelvic radiation therapy
  • Requirement for a Substitute Decision Maker
  • Inability to attend the workshop
  • Unwilling to attend an English-language workshop
  • Unwilling to complete English-language surveys

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
No Intervention: Standard of care
Experimental: Workshop
90 minute workshop on either Urinary Incontinence (UI) or Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP)

The first 15 minutes will be an information session on either Urinary Incontinence (UI) or Pelvic Organ Prolapse (PO) led by a Nurse Continence Advisor.

The following 60 minutes will comprise a psychologist-led group discussion. The structured discussion will encourage participants to share experiences, thoughts, and feelings on pelvic floor disorders. Resistances and barriers to seeking treatment will be discussed. Decision-making processes will be explored.

During the final 15 minutes, participants will be asked to complete a survey to evaluate the workshop. The survey will assess satisfaction with the information provided, quality of group discussion, comfort level with the group experience, and their satisfaction with the roles of the nurse continence advisor and psychologist.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in "Decisional Conflict" between baseline and followup, as measured by the Decisional Conflict Scale (O'Connor 1995).
Time Frame: The Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), will be administered to participants in the control and intervention groups at baseline and first follow up visit, approx. 3 months later.
The decisional conflict scale (DCS) is a validated scale that measures (a) perceived uncertainty between options, (b) factors contributing to uncertainty (feeling uninformed, unclear about values, unsupported in decision making), and (c) factors contributing to effective decision making (feeling the choice is informed, values-based, likely to be implemented, and satisfaction with the decision). 13 A total decisional conflict score from 0 (no decisional conflict) to 100 (extremely high decisional conflict) is given, as well as five sub-scores for each factor listed above.
The Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), will be administered to participants in the control and intervention groups at baseline and first follow up visit, approx. 3 months later.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Participant satisfaction with the workshop.
Time Frame: This will be measured using a survey administered to participants immediately following the workshop
Non-validated questionnaire addressing participants' perceived satisfaction with the following aspects of the workshop: group discussion, the information session, and the workshop as a whole. In addition there are four free text questions: 1) What changes will you make in your decision for treatment as a result of this workshop?; 2)Tell us about one thing you found most valuable in this workshop; 3)What would you change about this workshop?; 4) Other comments
This will be measured using a survey administered to participants immediately following the workshop

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Collaborators

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Joyce Schachter, MD, FRCSC, The Ottawa Hospital

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

May 1, 2016

Primary Completion (Actual)

May 1, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

November 6, 2017

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

December 22, 2015

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 28, 2016

First Posted (Estimate)

May 2, 2016

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

March 21, 2019

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 19, 2019

Last Verified

March 1, 2019

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Pelvic Floor Disorders

Clinical Trials on Workshop

3
Subscribe