Cargando…

Women’s values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pregnancy is an important cause of maternal morbidity and mortality. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is the cornerstone of prophylaxis and treatment of thrombotic events during pregnancy. LMWH has fewer adverse effects than other anticoagulants, does n...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: León-García, Montserrat, Humphries, Brittany, Maraboto, Andrea, Rabassa, Montserrat, Boehmer, Kasey R., Perestelo-Perez, Lilisbeth, Xie, Feng, Pelayo, Irene, Eckman, Mark, Bates, Shannon, Selva, Anna, Alonso-Coello, Pablo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9533610/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36199014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-05042-x
_version_ 1784802381590953984
author León-García, Montserrat
Humphries, Brittany
Maraboto, Andrea
Rabassa, Montserrat
Boehmer, Kasey R.
Perestelo-Perez, Lilisbeth
Xie, Feng
Pelayo, Irene
Eckman, Mark
Bates, Shannon
Selva, Anna
Alonso-Coello, Pablo
author_facet León-García, Montserrat
Humphries, Brittany
Maraboto, Andrea
Rabassa, Montserrat
Boehmer, Kasey R.
Perestelo-Perez, Lilisbeth
Xie, Feng
Pelayo, Irene
Eckman, Mark
Bates, Shannon
Selva, Anna
Alonso-Coello, Pablo
author_sort León-García, Montserrat
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pregnancy is an important cause of maternal morbidity and mortality. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is the cornerstone of prophylaxis and treatment of thrombotic events during pregnancy. LMWH has fewer adverse effects than other anticoagulants, does not cross the placenta, and is safe for the fetus. However, the use of LMWH during pregnancy is sensitive to womens’ underlying preferences. The objective of this review is to systematically assess women’s values and preferences research evidence on this topic. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases from inception to March 2022, and included studies examining values and preferences of using LMWH among pregnant women at risk of VTE. We followed a convergent integrated mixed-methods design to compare and contrast quantitative outcomes (utility and non-utility measures) and qualitative findings. We assessed the certainty of the values and preferences evidence with the GRADE approach for quantitative findings, and with GRADE-CERqual for qualitative evidence. Results were presented in a conjoint display. RESULTS: We screened 3,393 references and identified seven eligible studies. The mixed methods analysis resulted in four themes. Datasets confirmed each other in that: 1) the majority of women consider that benefits of treatment outweigh the inconveniences of daily injections; and 2) main concerns around medication are safety and injections administration. Quantitative outcomes expanded on the qualitative findings in that: 3) participants who perceived a higher risk of VTE were more willing to take LMWH. Finally, we found a discrepancy between the datasets around: 4) the amount of information preferred to make the decision; however, qualitative data expanded to clarify that women prefer making informed decisions and receive support from their clinician in their decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: We are moderately confident that in the context of pregnancy, using LMWH is preferred by women given its net beneficial balance. Integrating data from different sources of evidence, and representing them in a jointly manner helps to identify patient’s values and preferences. Our results may inform clinical practice guidelines and support shared decision-making process in the clinical encounter for the management of VTE in the context of pregnancy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-022-05042-x.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9533610
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95336102022-10-06 Women’s values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review León-García, Montserrat Humphries, Brittany Maraboto, Andrea Rabassa, Montserrat Boehmer, Kasey R. Perestelo-Perez, Lilisbeth Xie, Feng Pelayo, Irene Eckman, Mark Bates, Shannon Selva, Anna Alonso-Coello, Pablo BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pregnancy is an important cause of maternal morbidity and mortality. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is the cornerstone of prophylaxis and treatment of thrombotic events during pregnancy. LMWH has fewer adverse effects than other anticoagulants, does not cross the placenta, and is safe for the fetus. However, the use of LMWH during pregnancy is sensitive to womens’ underlying preferences. The objective of this review is to systematically assess women’s values and preferences research evidence on this topic. METHODS: We searched four electronic databases from inception to March 2022, and included studies examining values and preferences of using LMWH among pregnant women at risk of VTE. We followed a convergent integrated mixed-methods design to compare and contrast quantitative outcomes (utility and non-utility measures) and qualitative findings. We assessed the certainty of the values and preferences evidence with the GRADE approach for quantitative findings, and with GRADE-CERqual for qualitative evidence. Results were presented in a conjoint display. RESULTS: We screened 3,393 references and identified seven eligible studies. The mixed methods analysis resulted in four themes. Datasets confirmed each other in that: 1) the majority of women consider that benefits of treatment outweigh the inconveniences of daily injections; and 2) main concerns around medication are safety and injections administration. Quantitative outcomes expanded on the qualitative findings in that: 3) participants who perceived a higher risk of VTE were more willing to take LMWH. Finally, we found a discrepancy between the datasets around: 4) the amount of information preferred to make the decision; however, qualitative data expanded to clarify that women prefer making informed decisions and receive support from their clinician in their decision-making process. CONCLUSIONS: We are moderately confident that in the context of pregnancy, using LMWH is preferred by women given its net beneficial balance. Integrating data from different sources of evidence, and representing them in a jointly manner helps to identify patient’s values and preferences. Our results may inform clinical practice guidelines and support shared decision-making process in the clinical encounter for the management of VTE in the context of pregnancy. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12884-022-05042-x. BioMed Central 2022-10-05 /pmc/articles/PMC9533610/ /pubmed/36199014 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-05042-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
León-García, Montserrat
Humphries, Brittany
Maraboto, Andrea
Rabassa, Montserrat
Boehmer, Kasey R.
Perestelo-Perez, Lilisbeth
Xie, Feng
Pelayo, Irene
Eckman, Mark
Bates, Shannon
Selva, Anna
Alonso-Coello, Pablo
Women’s values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review
title Women’s values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review
title_full Women’s values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review
title_fullStr Women’s values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Women’s values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review
title_short Women’s values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review
title_sort women’s values and preferences on low-molecular-weight heparin and pregnancy: a mixed-methods systematic review
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9533610/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36199014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-05042-x
work_keys_str_mv AT leongarciamontserrat womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT humphriesbrittany womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT marabotoandrea womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT rabassamontserrat womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT boehmerkaseyr womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT peresteloperezlilisbeth womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT xiefeng womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT pelayoirene womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT eckmanmark womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT batesshannon womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT selvaanna womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview
AT alonsocoellopablo womensvaluesandpreferencesonlowmolecularweightheparinandpregnancyamixedmethodssystematicreview