Background Female patients with pelvic organ prolapse and clinicians need to take decisions regarding treatment that are often unpredictable in relation to how they impact the future everyday lives of the patients. This study formed the developmental phase of a larger study to develop and test an online tool to support shared decision-making. Methods Patients, health care professionals and other stakeholders participated in the development and evaluation process of this tool. The collected data was generated from observational studies, exploratory interviews with prompt cards and workshops with end users from four Danish gynecology outpatient clinics. Results Content analysis led to important themes. For the patients three themes emerged: 1) how the impact of symptoms on everyday life affected the need for relief, 2) their bodily perception and sex life and 3) their worries about the future. For clinicians the different symptoms and their severity was a main theme. Conclusions This article provides an overall description and discussion of the development methodology. It demonstrates how user involvement informed the prototyping process and how patients’ preferences were included in the final prototype. Whether the tool actually increases SDM, remains to be tested in a pilot feasibility study.

A preference-sensitive instrument for women with pelvic organ prolapse was developed to increase shared decisionmaking. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial to measure the effectiveness of the instrument. A pilot randomized controlled trial was conducted at three Danish gynecological clinics to assess feasibility through recruitment rates, per-protocol use and women's perception of (1) support for decision-making, (2) shared decision-making (Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire), and (3) satisfaction with their decisions. In addition, a focus group interview with participating gynecologists (five gynecologists) was conducted. We invited 226 women and recruited 46 (20%). The most common reason (45%) for nonparticipation was overlooking the invitation in their online public mailbox. Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire showed high data completeness (96%) but indicated a ceiling effect. Women felt the developed instrument supported their decision-making and more so if it was used interactively during consultations. Despite finding the instrument generally useful, gynecologists tended to apply the instrument inconsistently and not per protocol (41%), and some used it as a template for all consultations. This pilot study indicates that recruitment methods, for a future randomized controlled trial, for example, nurse-led preconsultations, need reconsideration due to low recruitment rates and inefficient per-protocol use. In a future randomized controlled trial, cluster randomization should avoid the carryover effect bias.