| Literature DB >> 35897499 |
Yulia Gendler1,2, Einat Birk3,4, Nili Tabak2, Silvia Koton2.
Abstract
The decision-making process regarding termination of pregnancy following prenatal diagnosis of congenital heart disease is a stressful experience for future parents. Janis and Mann's conflict decision-making model describes seven ideal stages that comprise vigilant information-gathering as an expression of the qualitative decision-making process. In our study, we attempted to determine whether parents who face the decision regarding termination of pregnancy undertake a qualitative decision-making process. Data were collected over 2-year period using structural questionnaires. The sample consisted of two hundred forty participants; sixty-nine (28.75%) declared that their decision was to terminate the pregnancy. A significant difference in the quality of the decision-making score was noted between parents who decided to continue with the pregnancy vs. parents who opted for termination (mean score of 10.15 (5.6) vs. 18.51 (3.9), respectively, p < 0.001). Sixty-two (90%) participants within the termination of pregnancy group went through all seven stages of vigilant decision-making process and utilized additional sources for information and consultation. Parents who decided to continue with the pregnancy made swift decisions, often without considering the negative and positive outcomes; this decision-making pattern is considered non-vigilant and ineffective. Identification of future parents at risk of going through an ineffective decision-making process may help health professionals to determine the best way to provide them with information and support.Entities:
Keywords: conflict decision-making model; congenital heart disease; decision-making process; termination of pregnancy; vigilance
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35897499 PMCID: PMC9331975 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19159137
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Socio-demographic characteristics of the study population (n = 240).
| Gender | |
| Male | 120 (50%) |
| Female | 120 (50%) |
| Age | 31.3 (4.5) |
| Population group | |
| Jews | 213 (88.8%) |
| Muslim Arabs | 22 (9.2%) |
| Other (Christian, Bedouin, Druze) | 5 (2%) |
| Religious affiliation | |
| Secular | 72 (30%) |
| Traditional | 74 (30.8%) |
| Religious | 74 (30.8%) |
| Jewish-Orthodox | 20 (8.4%) |
| Higher education achieved | |
| Primary education | 20 (8.4%) |
| Secondary education | 61 (25.4%) |
| Diploma | 56 (23.3%) |
| Academic degree | 103 (42.9%) |
| Years of education | 14.1 (2.3) |
Figure 1Differences in the total scores of ‘vigilant information processing’ between ‘continuation of pregnancy’ and ‘termination of pregnancy’ groups. t = 13.587, p < 0.001. * Mean and median scores of the quality of the decision-making process: ‘Continuation of pregnancy’ group: M (SD) = 10.15 (5.6); Med [range] = 11 [0–21], ‘Termination of pregnancy’ group: M (SD) = 18.51 (3.9); Med [range] = 21 [3–21].
Figure 2Utilization of information sources—comparison between ‘continuation of pregnancy’ and ‘termination of pregnancy’ groups; ** p < 0.001.
Figure 3Utilization of sources for consultation—comparison between ‘continuation of pregnancy’ and ‘termination of pregnancy’ groups; * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.001.
Logistic regression model of factors that influence vigilance in the decision-making process.
| Factors | OR | 95% CI |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | |||
| Gender | ||||
| Male | 1 (Ref) | |||
| Female | 6.49 | 2.85 | 14.78 | <0.001 |
| Population group | ||||
| Other | 1 (Ref) | |||
| Jews | 1.13 | 0.31 | 4.17 | 0.86 |
| Religious affiliation | ||||
| Other | 1 (Ref) | |||
| Secular | 2.51 | 1.14 | 5.53 | <0.001 |
| Years of education | ||||
| Estimate for each year | 1.41 | 1.17 | 1.71 | <0.001 |
| Decision to terminate the pregnancy | ||||
| No | 1 (Ref) | |||
| Yes | 64.23 | 19.83 | 99.71 | <0.001 |
CI—Confidence Interval; Ref—Reference. The scores of the decision-making quality scale were grouped into two categories: a score of from 0 to 14, which signified a ‘non-quality decision,’ and from 15 to 21—a ‘quality decision’.