Questa pagina è stata tradotta automaticamente e l'accuratezza della traduzione non è garantita. Si prega di fare riferimento al Versione inglese per un testo di partenza.

Shared Decision-Making During Anesthesia Consent for Elective Cesarean Delivery (SDM-Consent)

5 ottobre 2026 aggiornato da: Ilana Sebbag, University of British Columbia

Perceived and Observed Shared Decision-Making During Anesthesia Consent for Elective Cesarean Delivery: A Cross-Sectional Study

Shared decision-making (SDM) is the accepted ethical and legal standard for informed consent, but it is not known how it operates in anesthesia consent for cesarean delivery. Neuraxial anesthesia is recommended for most cesarean deliveries, and many anesthesiologists therefore present it as the only primary option, with general anesthesia (GA) available only as a rescue. Others present GA as a genuine alternative the patient can choose. This study will observe the existing variation in practice and will not change care. A trained observer will attend the pre-operative anesthesia consent encounter for women having an elective cesarean delivery at BC Women's Hospital and record which options were presented, using the observer-rated OPTION-5 instrument. Written research consent and a questionnaire follow 24-48 hours after delivery, and include the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). The primary aim is to compare patient-perceived SDM (SDM-Q-9) between consultations in which GA was offered as a genuine primary option and those in which it was not. This study hypothesizes that the SDM-Q-9 score will be higher when GA was offered as a primary option. Secondary aims are to describe observed SDM, decisional conflict, provider-level variation, and women's preference to be offered a choice in a future cesarean. The findings will inform a planned interventional trial of a standardized consent model.

Panoramica dello studio

Descrizione dettagliata

Background. SDM, in which the clinician contributes evidence and the patient contributes values and preferences, is the ethical and increasingly the legal standard of consent (Hopp v Lepp; Reibl v Hughes; Montgomery v Lanarkshire). Major guidelines recommend neuraxial anesthesia for cesarean delivery because of the higher maternal risk of GA, and the SOAP Center of Excellence benchmark is a GA rate below 5%. Choice of technique is nevertheless preference-sensitive (being awake or asleep at the birth, partner presence, fear of needles or of awareness, prior trauma), and GA is routinely delivered when clinically required. Neuraxial block fails in about 5% of cesarean deliveries and intraoperative pain occurs in roughly 11-22%, a leading cause of maternal dissatisfaction and medicolegal action. The institutional consent discloses these risks. What varies between providers is choice: some present GA as a genuine primary option alongside neuraxial anesthesia, while others present neuraxial as the sole primary technique with GA only as rescue. A departmental poll found that 6 of 21 anesthesiologists (29%) report offering GA as a primary option. It is unknown whether offering GA as a genuine primary option affects women's perception of SDM.

Design. Single-centre, prospective, cross-sectional study at BC Women's Hospital, Vancouver. It combines (a) structured direct observation of the pre-operative anesthesia consent encounter and (b) a patient questionnaire on the 1st or 2nd postpartum day. No change is made to clinical care or to the consent process; existing variation in practice is the exposure. Because the anesthesiologist is assigned by the duty rota, women are quasi-randomly exposed to consent with or without a genuine primary choice.

Recruitment. A member of the circle of care (admitting nurse) asks the patient on the day of surgery whether they are willing to be approached. Only if they agree does a trained observer introduce the study and seek verbal assent to observation. Written informed consent is obtained 24-48 hours postpartum by a trained research assistant who is not the observer. The clinical anesthesia consent (routine care, observed) and the research consent (written, not observed) are separate processes. Providers receive an individual information sheet with an opt-out, and no per-case feedback is given. The specific exposure of interest is withheld from providers until study end; providers are not deceived about being observed.

Measures. Exposure: observer-classified offer of GA as a genuine primary option (yes/no). Observed SDM: OPTION-5, with at least 10% double-rated. Perceived SDM: SDM-Q-9 (primary outcome). Decisional conflict: Decisional Conflict Scale, descriptive. Future-choice preference. Covariates: age, parity, prior cesarean, prior anesthesia experience, education, gestational age, technique received, consultation duration.

Sample size and analysis. The primary analysis is a linear mixed-effects model with a random intercept for consenting provider, adjusted for covariates, reporting the adjusted mean difference with its 95% CI and the provider-level ICC. Assuming SD 12.4, alpha 0.05, a difference of 13.5 points, and ICC 0.10, 84 analyzable patients (4 per provider across 21 providers) give 97.7% power. Allowing about 20% attrition, the recruitment target is 105. A blinded biostatistician check of ICC, exposure split and SD after the first 105 patients will verify power; any increase in sample size will be submitted to the REB as an amendment. Reporting follows STROBE.

Data. Data are held in the institutional BCCHR/PHSA-hosted REDCap instance, keyed by study ID, with the re-identification key stored separately. Records are retained for 5 years after study completion and publication.

Tipo di studio

Osservativo

Iscrizione (Stimato)

105

Contatti e Sedi

Questa sezione fornisce i recapiti di coloro che conducono lo studio e informazioni su dove viene condotto lo studio.

Contatto studio

Luoghi di studio

    • British Columbia
      • Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V6H 3N1
        • BC Women's Hospital

Criteri di partecipazione

I ricercatori cercano persone che corrispondano a una certa descrizione, chiamata criteri di ammissibilità. Alcuni esempi di questi criteri sono le condizioni generali di salute di una persona o trattamenti precedenti.

Criteri di ammissibilità

Età idonea allo studio

19 anni e precedenti (Adulto, Adulto più anziano)

Accetta volontari sani

No

Sessi ammissibili allo studio

Femmina

Metodo di campionamento

Campione non probabilistico

Popolazione di studio

Women aged 19 or older having an elective cesarean delivery at 37 weeks or later at BC Women's Hospital, with anesthesia consent obtained on the day of surgery.

Descrizione

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Age 19 years or older
  • Elective (scheduled) cesarean delivery at 37 weeks' gestation or later
  • Anesthesia consent obtained on the day of surgery
  • Anesthesia consent performed in English without an interpreter
  • Capacity to consent to research participation

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Conversion to urgent/emergency cesarean delivery before consent is completed
  • Severe maternal or neonatal complication making participation inappropriate (assessed case by case with the clinical team)
  • Contraindication to neuraxial anesthesia
  • Patient declines observation pre-operatively, or declines or withdraws study consent postpartum

Piano di studio

Questa sezione fornisce i dettagli del piano di studio, compreso il modo in cui lo studio è progettato e ciò che lo studio sta misurando.

Come è strutturato lo studio?

Dettagli di progettazione

  • Modelli osservazionali: COHORT
  • Prospettive temporali: CROSS_SECTIONAL

Coorti e interventi

Gruppo / Coorte
Intervento / Trattamento
GA offered as a primary option

Women whose observed pre-operative anesthesia consent presented general anesthesia as a genuine primary option the patient could choose, alongside neuraxial anesthesia. Classified per consultation by the trained observer.

A trained non-treating observer attends and rates the routine pre-operative anesthesia consent encounter (OPTION-5). The patient completes a questionnaire 24-48 hours postpartum (SDM-Q-9, Decisional Conflict Scale). No change to clinical care.

Neuraxial only, GA as rescue

Women whose observed pre-operative anesthesia consent presented neuraxial anesthesia as the sole primary technique, with general anesthesia available only as a rescue.

A trained non-treating observer attends and rates the routine pre-operative anesthesia consent encounter (OPTION-5). The patient completes a questionnaire 24-48 hours postpartum (SDM-Q-9, Decisional Conflict Scale). No change to clinical care.

Cosa sta misurando lo studio?

Misure di risultato primarie

Misura del risultato
Misura Descrizione
Lasso di tempo
Patient-perceived shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9 score)
Lasso di tempo: Post-operative day 1 or 2

Between-group difference in SDM-Q-9 total score (0-45), (higher = greater perceived involvement), between women whose consent included GA as a genuine primary option and those whose consent did not. Analysed with a linear mixed-effects model with a random intercept for consenting provider.

Post-operative day 1 or 2

Misure di risultato secondarie

Misura del risultato
Misura Descrizione
Lasso di tempo
Proportion with adequate SDM-Q-9 score
Lasso di tempo: Post-operative day 1 or 2

Proportion of patients with an adequate 9-item Shared-Decision Making Score (SDM-Q-9,) score 0-45, transformed to a 0-100% scale, and using the top-box method to determine adequate (>75%) vs inadequate (<75%) scores, compared between exposure groups.

Post-operative day 1 or 2
Observed shared decision-making (OPTION-5)
Lasso di tempo: Day of surgery, within 15 minutes of the consent encounter

Observer-rated OPTION-5 score (0-20), with higher scores meaning higher observed levels of shared-decision making between provider and patient, overall and by exposure group, with concordance with the SDM-Q-9.

Day of surgery, within 15 minutes of the consent encounter
Provider variability in offering choice
Lasso di tempo: Day of surgery, at the consent encounter

Proportion of consultations in which a genuine primary choice was offered; between-provider variation (ICC); whether offers were provider-initiated or prompted by patient questions; disclosure elements delivered.

Day of surgery, at the consent encounter
Decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale, 16-item)
Lasso di tempo: Post-operative day 1 or 2

DCS score by exposure group, reported descriptively (mean, 95% CI, proportion above 37.5, and floor proportion).

Post-operative day 1 or 2
Preference for future choice
Lasso di tempo: Post-operative day 1 or 2

Proportion of women who would want to be offered a choice between neuraxial and general anesthesia in a future cesarean, overall and by exposure group and technique received.

Post-operative day 1 or 2

Collaboratori e investigatori

Qui è dove troverai le persone e le organizzazioni coinvolte in questo studio.

Pubblicazioni e link utili

La persona responsabile dell'inserimento delle informazioni sullo studio fornisce volontariamente queste pubblicazioni. Questi possono riguardare qualsiasi cosa relativa allo studio.

Pubblicazioni generali

Studiare le date dei record

Queste date tengono traccia dell'avanzamento della registrazione dello studio e dell'invio dei risultati di sintesi a ClinicalTrials.gov. I record degli studi e i risultati riportati vengono esaminati dalla National Library of Medicine (NLM) per assicurarsi che soddisfino specifici standard di controllo della qualità prima di essere pubblicati sul sito Web pubblico.

Studia le date principali

Inizio studio (Stimato)

1 ottobre 2026

Completamento primario (Stimato)

1 dicembre 2027

Completamento dello studio (Stimato)

31 dicembre 2027

Date di iscrizione allo studio

Primo inviato

29 settembre 2026

Primo inviato che soddisfa i criteri di controllo qualità

29 settembre 2026

Primo Inserito (Effettivo)

5 ottobre 2026

Aggiornamenti dei record di studio

Ultimo aggiornamento pubblicato (Effettivo)

8 ottobre 2026

Ultimo aggiornamento inviato che soddisfa i criteri QC

5 ottobre 2026

Ultimo verificato

1 ottobre 2026

Maggiori informazioni

Termini relativi a questo studio

Piano per i dati dei singoli partecipanti (IPD)

Hai intenzione di condividere i dati dei singoli partecipanti (IPD)?

NO

Descrizione del piano IPD

There is currently no plan to share individual participant data (IPD). De-identified data may be made available if required by a journal as a condition of publication, subject to institutional, ethical, and privacy requirements.

Informazioni su farmaci e dispositivi, documenti di studio

Studia un prodotto farmaceutico regolamentato dalla FDA degli Stati Uniti

No

Studia un dispositivo regolamentato dalla FDA degli Stati Uniti

No

Queste informazioni sono state recuperate direttamente dal sito web clinicaltrials.gov senza alcuna modifica. In caso di richieste di modifica, rimozione o aggiornamento dei dettagli dello studio, contattare register@clinicaltrials.gov. Non appena verrà implementata una modifica su clinicaltrials.gov, questa verrà aggiornata automaticamente anche sul nostro sito web .

Sottoscrivi