此页面是自动翻译的,不保证翻译的准确性。请参阅 英文版 对于源文本。

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

2026年10月5日 更新者: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.

研究概览

详细说明

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.

研究类型

观察性的

注册 (估计的)

105

联系人和位置

本节提供了进行研究的人员的详细联系信息,以及有关进行该研究的地点的信息。

学习联系方式

学习地点

    • British Columbia
      • Vancouver、British Columbia、加拿大、V6H 3N1
        • BC Women's Hospital

参与标准

研究人员寻找符合特定描述的人,称为资格标准。这些标准的一些例子是一个人的一般健康状况或先前的治疗。

资格标准

适合学习的年龄

19年 及以上 (成人、年长者)

接受健康志愿者

不

有资格学习的性别

女性

取样方法

非概率样本

研究人群

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.

描述

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

学习计划

本节提供研究计划的详细信息,包括研究的设计方式和研究的衡量标准。

研究是如何设计的?

设计细节

  • 观测模型:COHORT
  • 时间观点:CROSS_SECTIONAL

队列和干预

团体/队列
干预/治疗
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.

研究衡量的是什么?

主要结果指标

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
Patient-perceived shared decision-making (SDM-Q-9 score)
大体时间: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

次要结果测量

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
Proportion with adequate SDM-Q-9 score
大体时间: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)
大体时间: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
大体时间: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)
大体时间: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
大体时间: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

合作者和调查者

在这里您可以找到参与这项研究的人员和组织。

出版物和有用的链接

负责输入研究信息的人员自愿提供这些出版物。这些可能与研究有关。

一般刊物

研究记录日期

这些日期跟踪向 ClinicalTrials.gov 提交研究记录和摘要结果的进度。研究记录和报告的结果由国家医学图书馆 (NLM) 审查,以确保它们在发布到公共网站之前符合特定的质量控制标准。

研究主要日期

学习开始 (估计的)

2026年10月1日

初级完成 (估计的)

2027年12月1日

研究完成 (估计的)

2027年12月31日

研究注册日期

首次提交

2026年9月29日

首先提交符合 QC 标准的

2026年9月29日

首次发布 (实际的)

2026年10月5日

研究记录更新

最后更新发布 (实际的)

2026年10月8日

上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新

2026年10月5日

最后验证

2026年10月1日

更多信息

与本研究相关的术语

计划个人参与者数据 (IPD)

计划共享个人参与者数据 (IPD)?

不

IPD 计划说明

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.

药物和器械信息、研究文件

研究美国 FDA 监管的药品

不

研究美国 FDA 监管的设备产品

不

此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索,没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求,请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改,我们的网站上也会自动更新.

订阅