Evaluating an Online Training Program on Shared Decision-making in Prenatal Screening

NCT ID: NCT04162288

Last Updated: 2021-02-11

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

36 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2019-08-01

Study Completion Date

2020-01-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The investigators aim to evaluate an online training program on shared decision making within the prenatal context. The main outcome is intention on using a decision aid in prenatal screening consultation and study population is nurses. Secondary outcomes are; knowledge acquisition, acceptability of the formation and perceived usefulness. The investigators hypothesise that this web-based SDM training program developed for the prenatal screening of Down Syndrome will significantly increase nurses' intentions to use the decision aid in their clinical practice with pregnant women and their partner.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Pregnant women have difficulty choosing among the wide variety of prenatal screening options available. To help pregnant women and their partners make informed decisions based on their values, needs and preferences, a decision aid (DA) has been developped and online shared decision-making (SDM) training program for health professionals has been created to support the use of this DA and give health care professionals key elements on SDM. The decision aid was found relevant and acceptable to pregnant women and their partners; the relevance and acceptability of the online SDM training program aren't evaluated yet. This study aim to assess the intention on using a DA after taking the online training program, to evaluate knowledge acquisition and to assess the program's acceptability and perceived usefulness. This is a multi-center, two-arm, controlled trial (RCT). Thirty-six participants will be randomly allocated to either 1) an experimental group that is exposed to the investigator's complete 3 hours online training program intervention (n = 18) or 2) a control group that is exposed to an intervention which will be a 3 hours online training program focused on prenatal screening alone.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Shared Decision Making

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

This is a multi-center, two-arm, controlled trial (RCT). Thirty-six participants will be randomly allocated to either 1) an experimental group that is exposed to our complete 3 hours online training program intervention (n = 18) or 2) a control group that is exposed to an intervention which will be a 3 hours online training program focused on prenatal screening.
Primary Study Purpose

OTHER

Blinding Strategy

TRIPLE

Participants Caregivers Investigators
When a participant is randomised to the trial, the private firm will assign a trial group following a pre-selected list of randomisation (given by the private firm). The employee of the private firm will be the one non-blinded in our study, by giving participant access to one of the formation. The ''Care Provider'' is not present in this study; in fact, all interactions are via the private firm and is directed towards an online-intervention. A randomisation list will be kept by the private firm and send to the research team after the data analysis. The Investigator are blinded also by the randomisation process. There is no officially Outcomes Assessor, because the outcomes of interest are self-reported (intention of using a DA) or pre-measured (for example; with the knowledge test, rightful answer are already known).

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Online training on SDM in prenatal screening

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Online Training - Shared Decision Making in Prenatal Screening

Intervention Type OTHER

TThe intervention consisted of an online self-study training program lasting 3 hours which aims to engage SDM in a prenatal screening context. The training was divided into four main modules: 1)SDM, 2)DS prenatal screening, 3)Decision aid and 4)Communication between healthcare professionals and patients. In each module, the targeted learning objectives and the work to be carried out (e.g. readings to be made, video to be viewed, evaluation to be carried out, etc.) are presented. Various teaching methods and medias are used during this training: videos, interviews, narrated capsule, readings, links to scientific articles and complementary websites. Videos are done with experts on SDM, ethics of prenatal testing. A simulation in the end is done to put participants in context of an actual consultation with a pregnant woman and her partner. This training was designed to adapt to the learning pace of the user, is hosted on University Laval platform and needs an identification code to enter.

Online training on prenatal screening

Group Type PLACEBO_COMPARATOR

Online Training - Online Training on Prenatal Screening

Intervention Type OTHER

The control intervention consisted of an online self-study training program lasting 3 hours which aims to provides knowledge for prenatal screening. The training has four main modules: 1)Context and history of prenatal screening(new), 2)DS prenatal screening(existing), 3)Consent in prenatal screening(new) and 4)Communication between healthcare professionals and patients(existing). In each module, the targeted learning objectives and the work to be carried out are presented. Various teaching methods and medias are used during this training: videos, interviews, narrated capsule, readings, links to scientific articles and complementary websites. Videos are done with experts on SDM, ethics of prenatal testing. For the 2 new modules, narrated capsules and reports have replaced videos of experts. There is no simulation at the end. This training was designed to adapt to the learning pace of the user, is hosted on University Laval platform and needs an identification code to enter.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Online Training - Shared Decision Making in Prenatal Screening

TThe intervention consisted of an online self-study training program lasting 3 hours which aims to engage SDM in a prenatal screening context. The training was divided into four main modules: 1)SDM, 2)DS prenatal screening, 3)Decision aid and 4)Communication between healthcare professionals and patients. In each module, the targeted learning objectives and the work to be carried out (e.g. readings to be made, video to be viewed, evaluation to be carried out, etc.) are presented. Various teaching methods and medias are used during this training: videos, interviews, narrated capsule, readings, links to scientific articles and complementary websites. Videos are done with experts on SDM, ethics of prenatal testing. A simulation in the end is done to put participants in context of an actual consultation with a pregnant woman and her partner. This training was designed to adapt to the learning pace of the user, is hosted on University Laval platform and needs an identification code to enter.

Intervention Type OTHER

Online Training - Online Training on Prenatal Screening

The control intervention consisted of an online self-study training program lasting 3 hours which aims to provides knowledge for prenatal screening. The training has four main modules: 1)Context and history of prenatal screening(new), 2)DS prenatal screening(existing), 3)Consent in prenatal screening(new) and 4)Communication between healthcare professionals and patients(existing). In each module, the targeted learning objectives and the work to be carried out are presented. Various teaching methods and medias are used during this training: videos, interviews, narrated capsule, readings, links to scientific articles and complementary websites. Videos are done with experts on SDM, ethics of prenatal testing. For the 2 new modules, narrated capsules and reports have replaced videos of experts. There is no simulation at the end. This training was designed to adapt to the learning pace of the user, is hosted on University Laval platform and needs an identification code to enter.

Intervention Type OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* Be a certified nurse
* Be involved in supporting prenatal screening decision-making or involved in prenatal screening processes in the province of Quebec;
* Speak and write in French
* Being in active practice within the last year.

Exclusion Criteria

* None
Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Laval University

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Genome Quebec

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

Genome Canada

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

CERSSPL

UNKNOWN

Sponsor Role collaborator

CHU de Quebec-Universite Laval

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

France Legare

Principal investigator

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

France Légaré, PhD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

VITAM - Centre de recherche en santé durable

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Leger

Québec, Quebec, Canada

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Canada

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Legare F, Witteman HO. Shared decision making: examining key elements and barriers to adoption into routine clinical practice. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Feb;32(2):276-84. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1078.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23381520 (View on PubMed)

Moulton B, Collins PA, Burns-Cox N, Coulter A. From informed consent to informed request: do we need a new gold standard? J R Soc Med. 2013 Oct;106(10):391-4. doi: 10.1177/0141076813490686. Epub 2013 Jun 6. No abstract available.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23759895 (View on PubMed)

Gray M, Jani A. Promoting Triple Value Healthcare in Countries with Universal Healthcare. Healthc Pap. 2016;15(3):42-8.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27009586 (View on PubMed)

Shay LA, Lafata JE. Where is the evidence? A systematic review of shared decision making and patient outcomes. Med Decis Making. 2015 Jan;35(1):114-31. doi: 10.1177/0272989X14551638. Epub 2014 Oct 28.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25351843 (View on PubMed)

Stacey D, Legare F, Col NF, Bennett CL, Barry MJ, Eden KB, Holmes-Rovner M, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Lyddiatt A, Thomson R, Trevena L, Wu JH. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Jan 28;(1):CD001431. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24470076 (View on PubMed)

Hibbard JH, Greene J. What the evidence shows about patient activation: better health outcomes and care experiences; fewer data on costs. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Feb;32(2):207-14. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2012.1061.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23381511 (View on PubMed)

Legare F, Stacey D, Turcotte S, Cossi MJ, Kryworuchko J, Graham ID, Lyddiatt A, Politi MC, Thomson R, Elwyn G, Donner-Banzhoff N. Interventions for improving the adoption of shared decision making by healthcare professionals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Sep 15;(9):CD006732. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006732.pub3.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 25222632 (View on PubMed)

Legare F, Adekpedjou R, Stacey D, Turcotte S, Kryworuchko J, Graham ID, Lyddiatt A, Politi MC, Thomson R, Elwyn G, Donner-Banzhoff N. Interventions for increasing the use of shared decision making by healthcare professionals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jul 19;7(7):CD006732. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006732.pub4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 30025154 (View on PubMed)

Legare F, St-Jacques S, Gagnon S, Njoya M, Brisson M, Fremont P, Rousseau F. Prenatal screening for Down syndrome: a survey of willingness in women and family physicians to engage in shared decision-making. Prenat Diagn. 2011 Apr;31(4):319-26. doi: 10.1002/pd.2624. Epub 2011 Jan 26.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 21268046 (View on PubMed)

St-Jacques S, Grenier S, Charland M, Forest JC, Rousseau F, Legare F. Decisional needs assessment regarding Down syndrome prenatal testing: a systematic review of the perceptions of women, their partners and health professionals. Prenat Diagn. 2008 Dec;28(13):1183-203. doi: 10.1002/pd.2059.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 19097031 (View on PubMed)

Couet N, Desroches S, Robitaille H, Vaillancourt H, Leblanc A, Turcotte S, Elwyn G, Legare F. Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making: a systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument. Health Expect. 2015 Aug;18(4):542-61. doi: 10.1111/hex.12054. Epub 2013 Mar 4.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23451939 (View on PubMed)

Legare F, O'Connor AC, Graham I, Saucier D, Cote L, Cauchon M, Pare L. Supporting patients facing difficult health care decisions: use of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. Can Fam Physician. 2006 Apr;52(4):476-7.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 17327891 (View on PubMed)

Legare F, Ratte S, Gravel K, Graham ID. Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: update of a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions. Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Dec;73(3):526-35. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.07.018. Epub 2008 Aug 26.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 18752915 (View on PubMed)

Stacey D, Hill S, McCaffery K, Boland L, Lewis KB, Horvat L. Shared Decision Making Interventions: Theoretical and Empirical Evidence with Implications for Health Literacy. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017;240:263-283.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28972523 (View on PubMed)

Legare F, Stacey D, Briere N, Fraser K, Desroches S, Dumont S, Sales A, Puma C, Aube D. Healthcare providers' intentions to engage in an interprofessional approach to shared decision-making in home care programs: a mixed methods study. J Interprof Care. 2013 May;27(3):214-22. doi: 10.3109/13561820.2013.763777. Epub 2013 Feb 8.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 23394265 (View on PubMed)

Leiva Portocarrero ME, Garvelink MM, Becerra Perez MM, Giguere A, Robitaille H, Wilson BJ, Rousseau F, Legare F. Decision aids that support decisions about prenatal testing for Down syndrome: an environmental scan. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2015 Sep 24;15:76. doi: 10.1186/s12911-015-0199-6.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 26404088 (View on PubMed)

Delanoe A, Lepine J, Turcotte S, Leiva Portocarrero ME, Robitaille H, Giguere AM, Wilson BJ, Witteman HO, Levesque I, Guillaumie L, Legare F. Role of Psychosocial Factors and Health Literacy in Pregnant Women's Intention to Use a Decision Aid for Down Syndrome Screening: A Theory-Based Web Survey. J Med Internet Res. 2016 Oct 28;18(10):e283. doi: 10.2196/jmir.6362.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27793792 (View on PubMed)

Delanoe A, Lepine J, Leiva Portocarrero ME, Robitaille H, Turcotte S, Levesque I, Wilson BJ, Giguere AM, Legare F. Health literacy in pregnant women facing prenatal screening may explain their intention to use a patient decision aid: a short report. BMC Res Notes. 2016 Jul 11;9:339. doi: 10.1186/s13104-016-2141-0.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 27401163 (View on PubMed)

Portocarrero ME, Giguere AM, Lepine J, Garvelink MM, Robitaille H, Delanoe A, Levesque I, Wilson BJ, Rousseau F, Legare F. Use of a patient decision aid for prenatal screening for Down syndrome: what do pregnant women say? BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Mar 20;17(1):90. doi: 10.1186/s12884-017-1273-0.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28320334 (View on PubMed)

WHO. Nine steps for developing a scaling-up strategy Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010. Available from: http://www.who.int/iris/handle/10665/44432.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Legare F, Borduas F, Freitas A, Jacques A, Godin G, Luconi F, Grimshaw J; CPD-KT team. Development of a simple 12-item theory-based instrument to assess the impact of continuing professional development on clinical behavioral intentions. PLoS One. 2014 Mar 18;9(3):e91013. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0091013. eCollection 2014.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 24643173 (View on PubMed)

Schmidt SW. The relationship between satisfaction with workplace training and overall job satisfaction. Human Resource Development Quarterly. 2007;18(4):481-98.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Kasper J, Liethmann K, Heesen C, Reissmann DR, Geiger F. Training doctors briefly and in situ to involve their patients in making medical decisions-Preliminary testing of a newly developed module. Health Expect. 2017 Dec;20(6):1254-1263. doi: 10.1111/hex.12565. Epub 2017 May 18.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 28521082 (View on PubMed)

Giangreco A, Sebastiano A, Peccei R. Trainees' reactions to training: an analysis of the factors affecting overall satisfaction with training. The international journal of human resource management. 2009;20(1):96-111.

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Kirkpatrick D, Kirkpatrick J. Evaluating Training Programs: The four levels. San Francisco, CA, USA: Berret-Koehler Publishers, Inc.; 2009

Reference Type BACKGROUND

Abbasgholizadeh Rahimi S, Lepine J, Croteau J, Robitaille H, Giguere AM, Wilson BJ, Rousseau F, Levesque I, Legare F. Psychosocial Factors of Health Professionals' Intention to Use a Decision Aid for Down Syndrome Screening: Cross-Sectional Quantitative Study. J Med Internet Res. 2018 Apr 25;20(4):e114. doi: 10.2196/jmir.9036.

Reference Type BACKGROUND
PMID: 29695369 (View on PubMed)

Poulin Herron A, Agbadje TT, Cote M, Djade CD, Roch G, Rousseau F, Legare F. Web-Based Training for Nurses on Shared Decision Making and Prenatal Screening for Down Syndrome: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Res Protoc. 2020 Oct 29;9(10):e17878. doi: 10.2196/17878.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 33118955 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

MP-20-2019-4571

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Shifting Options Study
NCT07225595 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
The 3D Cohort Study (Design, Develop, Discover)
NCT03113331 ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Prenatal Genetics Chatbot Trial: Prenatal GENEie
NCT07077707 NOT_YET_RECRUITING NA