Communication about maternal-fetal surgery for myelomeningocele and congenital diaphragmatic hernia: preliminary findings with implications for informed consent and shared decision-making

Abstract

Objective: To examine the style and content of consultations for maternal-fetal surgery and draw conclusions about best practices for informed consent and shared decision-making.

Study design: Qualitative study of 15 h-long consultations with women diagnosed with fetal myelomeningocele (MMC, n=11) or congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH, n=4) who were potential candidates for maternal-fetal surgery at a large children's hospital in the Southwestern US.

Results: Major findings were that physicians tended to discuss the risks of fetal prognosis qualitatively more often than quantitatively (70% compared to 30%) and when mortality was a risk the "positive" (percentage survival) frame was always given rather than the morality frame. On average, families only talked 15% of the time and 45% of all their questions were about diagnostic or surgical procedure clarification.

Conclusion: Efforts should be made to minimize qualitative presentation of risk, which can be vague and confusing to patients. Both survival and mortality frames should be used to avoid biased decision-making. Communication and decision support tools that facilitate more shared decision-making between families and physicians are needed.