Assessing Women's Preferences for Postpartum Thromboprophylaxis: the PREFER-PostPartum

NCT ID: NCT05318547

Last Updated: 2023-08-09

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: UNKNOWN
• Clinical Phase: NA
• Total Enrollment: 52 participants
• Study Classification: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2022-05-13
• Study Completion Date: 2024-12-31

Brief Summary

The risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), which consists of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), increases during pregnancy and most strikingly in the postpartum period (6 weeks after delivery). Extensive research efforts have led to the identification of many risk factors for VTE events. Examples of such factors include maternal characteristics (personal history of VTE, thrombophilia, obesity, race) and obstetrical characteristics (methods of delivery, pre-term delivery, growth retardation). These allow care providers to risk stratify women at the time of delivery into low, moderate and high-risk women, based on experts' opinion. Further, a risk score, which was recently developed and validated on English and Swedish populations, estimates the risk of postpartum VTE in individuals.

Thromboprophylaxis (TPX) focuses on the use of short-term low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). LMWH is believed to reduce the risk of VTE by 50-70%, but the evidence is indirect, with a lack of large-scale randomized trial in the setting of the postpartum period. Further, LMWH is both inconvenient (subcutaneous injections) and possibly associated with haemorrhagic side effects. Alternative drugs do not exist, because direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) and aspirin are not studied in this setting and because DOAC are contra-indicated in pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Given the unclear balance of benefits and risks, current guidelines vary greatly in the proportion of women with recommended TPX. Gassmann et al. have recently demonstrated, among a cohort of parturients at the Geneva University Hospitals: a recommendation of postpartum TPX in 40.1% of women, with an estimated mean risk of postpartum VTE of 0.12%, according to the 2015 UK guidelines (RCOG), and a recommendation of postpartum TPX in 8.7% of women, with an estimated mean risk of postpartum VTE of 0.20%, according to the 2018 US guidance (ACOG).These low risks of VTE to trigger a recommendation of TPX use contrast with that of experts' opinions, which advocate for a threshold of VTE risk of 1-3% to recommend the use of TPX. Currently, all women delivering by C-section in Geneva receive TPX regardless of their VTE risk.

This dramatic discrepancy of TPX guidance between guidelines, and between guidelines and individual experts, highlights the uncertainty in this setting. Womens' preferences would be critically important here, to guide a rationale and desired use of TPX. Quite surprisingly, such preferences have never been elicited, in spite of the very large number of births every year (5 and 4 million in Europe and the US, respectively).

To inform prescription patterns of postpartum TPX, investigators propose to conduct this prospective study to elicit values and preferences of pregnant and postpartum women.

Conditions

Pregnancy

Study Design

• Allocation Method: RANDOMIZED
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Primary Study Purpose: OTHER
• Blinding Strategy: NONE

Study Groups

standard-gamble technique

Participants will be asked to imagine a scenario in which they are experiencing one of the 4 described conditions in the long-term. They will declare their preference between (a) keeping this long-term condition as is, or using a painless hypothetical cure that is associated with some risk of death, with the help of a visual aid on a laptop or tablet. A ping-pong technique will be applied until the point of equipoise is reached, when there is indecision whether to take the treatment or not. The utility will be calculated as 1 - the obtained risk of death of the point of equipoise. Health states will be evaluted in different orders across participants.

The elicitation of health state utilites by the standard-gamble technique is further clarified.

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

standard-gamble technique

Intervention Type: OTHER

Participants will be asked to imagine a scenario in which they are experiencing one of the 4 described conditions in the long-term. They will declare their preference between (a) keeping this long-term condition as is, or using a painless hypothetical cure that is associated with some risk of death, with the help of a visual aid on a laptop or tablet. A ping-pong technique will be applied until the point of equipoise is reached, when there is indecision whether to take the treatment or not. The utility will be calculated as 1 - the obtained risk of death of the point of equipoise. Health states will be evaluted in different orders across participants.

The elicitation of health state utilites by the standard-gamble technique is further clarified.

time trade-off technique

Participants will be asked to declare their preference between 50 years of life with the symptoms of 1 of the conditions, or 50-X years without these symptoms, with the help of a visual aid on a laptop or tablet. A ping-pong technique will be applied until the point of equipoise is reached, when there is indecision on the preference of the 2 choices. The utility will be calculated as the 50-x/50 obtained at this point of equipoise. Health states will be evaluted in different orders across participants.

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

time trade-off technique

Intervention Type: OTHER

Participants will be asked to declare their preference between 50 years of life with the symptoms of 1 of the conditions, or 50-X years without these symptoms, with the help of a visual aid on a laptop or tablet. A ping-pong technique will be applied until the point of equipoise is reached, when there is indecision on the preference of the 2 choices. The utility will be calculated as the 50-x/50 obtained at this point of equipoise. Health states will be evaluted in different orders across participants.

Interventions

standard-gamble technique

Participants will be asked to imagine a scenario in which they are experiencing one of the 4 described conditions in the long-term. They will declare their preference between (a) keeping this long-term condition as is, or using a painless hypothetical cure that is associated with some risk of death, with the help of a visual aid on a laptop or tablet. A ping-pong technique will be applied until the point of equipoise is reached, when there is indecision whether to take the treatment or not. The utility will be calculated as 1 - the obtained risk of death of the point of equipoise. Health states will be evaluted in different orders across participants.

The elicitation of health state utilites by the standard-gamble technique is further clarified.

Intervention Type: OTHER

time trade-off technique

Participants will be asked to declare their preference between 50 years of life with the symptoms of 1 of the conditions, or 50-X years without these symptoms, with the help of a visual aid on a laptop or tablet. A ping-pong technique will be applied until the point of equipoise is reached, when there is indecision on the preference of the 2 choices. The utility will be calculated as the 50-x/50 obtained at this point of equipoise. Health states will be evaluted in different orders across participants.

Intervention Type: OTHER

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• Women aged ≥18 years
• Ongoing pregnancy or in the early postpartum period (within 7 days of delivery)
• Participants may be with or without prior VTE or major bleeding, and with or without previous/current use of postpartum TPX.
• Fluency in French
• Women are able and willing to give free, informed and written consent

Exclusion Criteria

• Fetal or neonatal death, in order not to bother women during their mourning.
• Women under tutorship or curatorship
• Women deprived of liberty

• Minimum Eligible Age: 18 Years
• Eligible Sex: FEMALE
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Sponsors

Fondation Hôpital Saint-Joseph

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Responsibility Role: SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Justine P Hugon Rodin, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Fondation Hôpital Saint-Joseph

Locations

Groupe Hospitalier Paris Saint-Joseph

Paris, , France

Site Status: RECRUITING

Countries

France

Central Contacts

Justine Hugon Rodin, MD

Role: CONTACT

jhugon@ghpsj.fr

144123934 ext. +33

Helene BEAUSSIER, PharmD, PhD

Role: CONTACT

crc@ghpsj.fr

0144127883 ext. +33

Facility Contacts

Justine P Hugon-Rodin, MD

Role: primary

jhugon@ghpsj.fr

0144123934 ext. +33

References

Pomp ER, Lenselink AM, Rosendaal FR, Doggen CJ. Pregnancy, the postpartum period and prothrombotic defects: risk of venous thrombosis in the MEGA study. J Thromb Haemost. 2008 Apr;6(4):632-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2008.02921.x. Epub 2008 Jan 31.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 18248600 (View on PubMed)

Blondon M, Quon BS, Harrington LB, Bounameaux H, Smith NL. Association between newborn birth weight and the risk of postpartum maternal venous thromboembolism: a population-based case-control study. Circulation. 2015 Apr 28;131(17):1471-6; discussion 1476. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.012749. Epub 2015 Mar 5.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 25745022 (View on PubMed)

Blondon M, Harrington LB, Boehlen F, Robert-Ebadi H, Righini M, Smith NL. Pre-pregnancy BMI, delivery BMI, gestational weight gain and the risk of postpartum venous thrombosis. Thromb Res. 2016 Sep;145:151-6. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2016.06.026. Epub 2016 Jun 24.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 27421192 (View on PubMed)

Sultan AA, West J, Grainge MJ, Riley RD, Tata LJ, Stephansson O, Fleming KM, Nelson-Piercy C, Ludvigsson JF. Development and validation of risk prediction model for venous thromboembolism in postpartum women: multinational cohort study. BMJ. 2016 Dec 5;355:i6253. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i6253.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 27919934 (View on PubMed)

Mismetti P, Laporte S, Darmon JY, Buchmuller A, Decousus H. Meta-analysis of low molecular weight heparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolism in general surgery. Br J Surg. 2001 Jul;88(7):913-30. doi: 10.1046/j.0007-1323.2001.01800.x.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 11442521 (View on PubMed)

Alalaf SK, Jawad RK, Muhammad PR, Ali MS, Al Tawil NG. Bemiparin versus enoxaparin as thromboprophylaxis following vaginal and abdominal deliveries: a prospective clinical trial. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Mar 28;15:72. doi: 10.1186/s12884-015-0515-2.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 25884460 (View on PubMed)

Bates SM, Rajasekhar A, Middeldorp S, McLintock C, Rodger MA, James AH, Vazquez SR, Greer IA, Riva JJ, Bhatt M, Schwab N, Barrett D, LaHaye A, Rochwerg B. American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: venous thromboembolism in the context of pregnancy. Blood Adv. 2018 Nov 27;2(22):3317-3359. doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2018024802.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 30482767 (View on PubMed)

Related Links

https://www.practiceupdate.com/content/risks-of-venous-thromboembolism-after-cesarean-section/40288

Risks of Venous Thromboembolism After Cesarean Section

https://www.rcog.org.uk/globalassets/documents/guidelines/gtg-37a.pdf

Reducing the Risk of Venous Thromboembolism during Pregnancy and the Puerperium

Other Identifiers

PREFER-PP

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id