Simone N Vigod1, Neesha Hussain-Shamsy2, Donna E Stewart3, Sophie Grigoriadis4, Kelly Metcalfe5, Tim F Oberlander6, Carrie Schram7, Valerie H Taylor8, Cindy-Lee Dennis9. 1. Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Women's College Hospital and Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada. Electronic address: simone.vigod@wchospital.ca. 2. Women's College Hospital and Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada. 3. Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada. 4. Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada. 5. Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 6. Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 7. Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 8. Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Institute for Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. 9. Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Decisions about antidepressant use in pregnancy are complex. We performed a pilot randomized controlled trial assessing the feasibility of a trial protocol for an online patient decision aid (PDA) for women deciding about antidepressant use in pregnancy. METHODS: 96 preconception and pregnant Canadian women recruited from specialist (n = 51) and non-specialist (n = 45) settings with Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS, range 0-100) score of ≥25 signifying moderate-to-high decisional conflict were randomly allocated to either the PDA or a control condition that guided participants to publicly available resources for advice around antidepressants and pregnancy. Follow-up data were collected at 4 weeks post-randomization. RESULTS: About 88.9% of eligible participants consented to participate. Women's views of the tool were positive; 88.7% of participants provided follow-up data. At follow-up, mean DCS score had decreased by 19.9 points in the PDA group vs. 13.3 in controls (adjusted mean difference, MD, 7.01, 95% CI -14.3 to 0.30). In the non-specialist setting, DCS scores decreased more for PDA users (25.5 points) than controls (10.5 points; adjusted MD -15.1, 95% CI -25.6 to -4.55); the MD was negligible in the specialist setting. LIMITATIONS: The main limitation is the highly educated, high-income nature of our sample. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of an online PDA for antidepressant use in pregnancy with national recruitment is feasible. Pilot results suggest that the tool is acceptable and reduces decisional conflict more than clinical care alone in a non-specialist setting. Evaluation of the PDA's impact on longer-term maternal and child clinical outcomes is a key next step.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Decisions about antidepressant use in pregnancy are complex. We performed a pilot randomized controlled trial assessing the feasibility of a trial protocol for an online patient decision aid (PDA) for women deciding about antidepressant use in pregnancy. METHODS: 96 preconception and pregnant Canadian women recruited from specialist (n = 51) and non-specialist (n = 45) settings with Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS, range 0-100) score of ≥25 signifying moderate-to-high decisional conflict were randomly allocated to either the PDA or a control condition that guided participants to publicly available resources for advice around antidepressants and pregnancy. Follow-up data were collected at 4 weeks post-randomization. RESULTS: About 88.9% of eligible participants consented to participate. Women's views of the tool were positive; 88.7% of participants provided follow-up data. At follow-up, mean DCS score had decreased by 19.9 points in the PDA group vs. 13.3 in controls (adjusted mean difference, MD, 7.01, 95% CI -14.3 to 0.30). In the non-specialist setting, DCS scores decreased more for PDA users (25.5 points) than controls (10.5 points; adjusted MD -15.1, 95% CI -25.6 to -4.55); the MD was negligible in the specialist setting. LIMITATIONS: The main limitation is the highly educated, high-income nature of our sample. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of an online PDA for antidepressant use in pregnancy with national recruitment is feasible. Pilot results suggest that the tool is acceptable and reduces decisional conflict more than clinical care alone in a non-specialist setting. Evaluation of the PDA's impact on longer-term maternal and child clinical outcomes is a key next step.
Authors: Neesha Hussain-Shamsy; Sarah Somerton; Donna E Stewart; Sophie Grigoriadis; Kelly Metcalfe; Tim F Oberlander; Carrie Schram; Valerie H Taylor; Cindy-Lee Dennis; Simone N Vigod Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2022-05-13 Impact factor: 3.298
Authors: Kristin Palmsten; Dani Bredesen; Meghan M JaKa; Pritika C Kumar; Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss; Elyse O Kharbanda Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2020-12-22 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Ami Tint; Hilary K Brown; Simon Chen; Meng-Chuan Lai; Lesley A Tarasoff; Simone N Vigod; Susan Parish; Susan M Havercamp; Yona Lunsky Journal: Autism Date: 2021-01-19
Authors: Rebecca Whybrow; Louise M Webster; Paul T Seed; Jane Sandall; Lucy C Chappell Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2022-01-29 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Sarah Kittel-Schneider; Ethel Felice; Rachel Buhagiar; Mijke Lambregtse-van den Berg; Claire A Wilson; Visnja Banjac Baljak; Katarina Savic Vujovic; Branislava Medic; Ana Opankovic; Ana Fonseca; Angela Lupattelli Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-10 Impact factor: 3.390