Pregnant women’s views on informed consent for research in labour

George, R.T.; Butcher, Matthew; Yentis, S. M.

doi:10.1016/j.ijoa.2014.03.004

Cited by 10 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Knowing the procedure well including understanding possible complications, as part of a medical treatment [29,30], may sometimes happen. According to previous study, all parturients can accept the complication of post dual puncture headache if they are explained before it happen [30][31][32][33][34]. In fact, although the rate of complications is independent from the level of explanation before interventions, some evidence showed increased preoperative satisfaction will decrease postoperative complications [19].…”

Section: Sdm Enhances the Understanding Of Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Satisfaction in parturients receiving epidural analgesia after prenatal shared decision-making intervention: a prospective, before-and-after cohort study

Cheng

Hung

et al. 2020

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The explanation of epidural analgesia by anesthesiologist would often begin after the parturient is admitted to the hospital. Because of labor pain, the decision of receiving epidural analgesia would often be made by the family members, instead of the parturient herself. We aimed to test whether earlier prenatal shared decisionmaking (SDM) interventions increase parturient's comprehension and satisfaction of epidural labor analgesia, compared to conventional explanation after labor pain begun. Methods: During the 28th week of gestation, we provided the SDM parturient health education as well as a leaflet with quick response codes. Scanning the code would link to education videoclips which explained what epidural analgesia is and its advantages and disadvantages. Original routine practice group parturients received explanation of analgesia after admission for delivery. To measure the satisfaction of labor pain service, the accessibility of information, and the communication with medical staff, we designed a questionnaire with reference to (1) Pregnancy and Maternity Care Patients' Experiences Questionnaire (PreMaPEQ), (2) Preterm Birth Experience and Satisfaction Scale (P-BESS), and (3) Women's Views of Birth Labor Satisfaction Questionnaire (WOMBLSQ). The questionnaire was amended after a pretest involving 30 parturients who had received epidural analgesia. Scree test analysis and exploratory factor analysis were performed; then, the questionnaire was revised again. A total of 200 valid questionnaires were collected-100 each from the original routine practice group and the SDM group. Results: The SDM group reported significantly higher satisfaction with and understanding of epidural analgesia, and a significantly higher satisfaction with the information received, and the quality of pain relief. After SDM intervention, significant increasement of the average satisfaction scores in question "my epidural is effective" (9.10%; mean difference: 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.17~0.59; p < 0.001) and "The effect of epidural is just as what I have expected" (10.41%; mean difference: 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.18~0.64; p < 0.001) was demonstrated.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sdm Enhances the Understanding Of Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Satisfaction in parturients receiving epidural analgesia after prenatal shared decision-making intervention: a prospective, before-and-after cohort study

Cheng

Hung

et al. 2020

BMC Pregnancy Childbirth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A substantial challenge to the conduct of an individually randomised trial is obtaining consent from women in labour who require emergency caesarean. 89,90 Therefore, meeting the target for recruitment in a challenging clinical context was a major achievement. We considered this group to be the one most likely to derive specific benefit from this health technology.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitations Of The Trialmentioning

confidence: 99%

A randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of intraoperative cell salvage during caesarean section in women at risk of haemorrhage: the SALVO (cell SALVage in Obstetrics) trial

Khan

Moore

Wilson

et al. 2018

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: journals.library@nihr.ac.ukThe full HTA archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Technology Assessment journalReports are published in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HTA programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors.Reviews in Health Technology Assessment are termed 'systematic' when the account of the search appraisal and synthesis methods (to minimise biases and random errors) would, in theory, permit the replication of the review by others. HTA programmeThe HTA programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was set up in 1993. It produces high-quality research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS. 'Health technologies' are broadly defined as all interventions used to promote health, prevent and treat disease, and improve rehabilitation and long-term care.The journal is indexed in NHS Evidence via its abstracts included in MEDLINE and its Technology Assessment Reports inform National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance. HTA research is also an important source of evidence for National Screening Committee (NSC) policy decisions.For more information about the HTA programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HTA programme as project number 10/57/32. The contractual start date was in October 2012. The draft report began editorial review in December 2016 and was accepted for publication in March 2017. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HTA editors and publisher have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the draft document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HTA programme or the Department of Health. Published by t...

show abstract

“…Informed Consent in Research means authorization by an individual to be recruited into any kind of research involving collection of information by an investigator. It is also required in medical practice before a patient can be given any medical care by the medical practitioner 10 , either for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes 11 . In both of these scenarios, the potential research participant or patient must get adequate information about all the details of the procedures, risks and benefits that they might experience by participating in a particular study or during the course of receiving treatment for their disease condition 10,12 .…”

Section: An Overview Of Informed Consent In Medical or Biomedical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

Is Informed Consent Necessary for Research on Stored Human Samples?

Sembajwe¹,

Kunwar²

2016

Arşiv Kaynak Tarama Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Informed consent is always required before patients can be treated in health centers as well as participating in any kind of research. This requirement often poses a serious challenge to researchers in situations where existing guidelines are not clear about the ownership of donated or discarded human biological samples in hospital archives. The current regulations demand that when doing research, the major bioethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence and justice should always be respected and adhered to. There is increased value of stored biomaterials due to advancement in biotechnology which has also contributed to increased debate on whether researchers should seek informed consent from the individual donors before such materials can be used for research. In enforcing these bioethical principles, most guidelines focus on research involving direct contact with human beings, and no much attention is given to stored or discarded body parts and biomaterials that end up being used for research in later years. There are some hypotheses that can be tested by doing research on the stored biological samples, especially by students or scientists attached to various University hospitals, researchcenters and laboratories. We attempt to provide some scenarios and reviewed guidelines that can help provide a consensus as to whether it is strictly necessary to have informed consent for research on stored or discarded human body parts and who should claim ownership of collected human biomaterials for research or potential commercial purposes.

show abstract

Pregnant women’s views on informed consent for research in labour

Cited by 10 publications

References 10 publications

Satisfaction in parturients receiving epidural analgesia after prenatal shared decision-making intervention: a prospective, before-and-after cohort study

Satisfaction in parturients receiving epidural analgesia after prenatal shared decision-making intervention: a prospective, before-and-after cohort study

A randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of intraoperative cell salvage during caesarean section in women at risk of haemorrhage: the SALVO (cell SALVage in Obstetrics) trial

Is Informed Consent Necessary for Research on Stored Human Samples?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About