Abstract
AbstractIndividuals having a genetic predisposition to cancer and their partners face challenging decisions regarding their wish to have children. This study aimed to determine the effects of an online decision aid to support couples in making an informed decision regarding their reproductive options. A nationwide pretest-posttest study was conducted in the Netherlands among 131 participants between November 2016 and May 2018. Couples were eligible for participation if one partner had a pathogenic variant predisposing for an autosomal dominant hereditary cancer syndrome. Participants completed a questionnaire before use (T0), and at 3 months (T3) after use of the decision aid to assess the primary outcome measure informed decision-making, and the secondary outcome measures decisional conflict, knowledge, realistic expectations, level of deliberation, and decision self-efficacy. T0–T3 comparisons show an overall positive effect for all outcome measures (all ps < 0.05; knowledge (ES = − 1.05), decisional conflict (ES = 0.99), participants’ decision self-efficacy (ES = −0.55), level of deliberation (ES = − 0.50), and realistic expectations (ES = − 0.44). Informed decision-making increased over time and 58.0% of the participants made an informed reproductive decision at T3. The online decision aid seems to be an appropriate tool to complement standard reproductive counseling to support our target group in making an informed reproductive decision. Use of the decision aid may lessen the negative psychological impact of decision-making on couples’ daily life and wellbeing.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Genetics(clinical),Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Epidemiology
Reference30 articles.
1. Bunn H, O’Connor A (1996) Validation of client decision-making instruments in the context of psychiatry. Can J Nurs Res 28(3):13–27
2. De Rycke M, Goossens V, Kokkali G, Meijer-Hoogeveen M, Coonen E, Moutou C (2015) ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection XIV–XV: cycles from January 2011 to December 2012 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2013. Hum Reprod 32(10):1974–1994
3. Dekeuwer C, Bateman S (2013) Much more than a gene: hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, reproductive choices and family life. Med Health Care Philos 16(2):231–244
4. Derks-Smeets I, Gietel-Habets J, Tibben et al (2014) Decision-making on preimplantation genetic diagnosis and prenatal diagnosis: a challenge for couples with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Hum Reprod 5(29):1103–1112
5. de Die-Smulders C, de Wert G, Liebaers I, Tibben A, Evers-Kiebooms G (2013) Reproductive options for prospective parents in families with Huntington’s disease: clinical, psychological and ethical reflections. Hum Reprod 19(3):304–315
Cited by
9 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献