To assess the effectiveness of patient decision aids to facilitate shared decision making in obstetrics and gynecology.
We searched ClinicalTrials.gov
, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility specialized register, CINAHL, and EMBASE from 1946 to July 2019.
METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION:
We selected randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids with usual clinical practice or a control intervention.
TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS:
Thirty-five randomized controlled trials, which reported data from 9,790 women, were included. Patient decision aids were evaluated within a wide range of clinical scenarios relevant to obstetrics and gynecology, including contraception, vaginal birth after cesarean delivery, and pelvic organ prolapse. Study characteristics and quality were recorded for each study. The meta-analysis was based on random-effects methods for pooled data. A standardized mean difference of 0.2 is considered small, 0.5 moderate, and 0.8 large. When compared with usual clinical practice, the use of patient decision aids reduced decisional conflict (standardized mean difference −0.23; 95% CI −0.36, to −0.11; 19 trials; 4,624 women) and improved patient knowledge (standardized mean difference 0.58; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.71; 17 trials; 4,375 women). There was no difference in patient anxiety (standardized mean difference −0.04; 95% CI −0.14 to 0.06; 12 trials; 2,714 women) or satisfaction (standardized mean difference 0.17; 95% CI 0.09 to 0.24; 6 trials; 2,718 women).
Patient decision aids are effective in facilitating shared decision making and can be helpful in clinical practice to support patient centered care informed by the best evidence.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:
PROSPERO International Register of Systematic Reviews, www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/89953