Duane, M., Martinez, V., Berry, M., & Manhart, M. D. (2022). Evaluation of a fertility awareness-based shared decision-making tool part 1: Study design and impact on clinician knowledge. PEC Innovation, 1, 100061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecinn.2022.100061
Duane M, Martinez V, Berry M, Manhart MD. Evaluation of a fertility awareness-based shared decision-making tool part 1: Study design and impact on clinician knowledge. PEC Innov. 2022;1:100061. doi:10.1016/j.pecinn.2022.100061
Duane, Marguerite, et al. "Evaluation of a fertility awareness-based shared decision-making tool part 1: Study design and impact on clinician knowledge." PEC Innovation, vol. 1, 2022, pp. 100061.
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
Open access
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
Fertility awareness training raised experienced clinicians' knowledge
Training on a shared decision-making tool raised experienced clinicians' knowledge of fertility awareness methods. In a study of 26 clinicians, mean test scores rose from 9.54 to 10.73 out of 12.
Key Findings
Mean knowledge score rose from 9.54 at baseline to 10.73 after online training and use of the shared decision-making tool, on a scale of 0–12 (p < 0.002).
After education and training, 80% of clinicians increased their test scores; 10 reached a perfect score, up from 2 at baseline, and 15 more scored 10 or 11.
Among the 26 participating clinicians, 92% already taught, recommended, or referred patients for fertility awareness-based methods, and more than 50% had recommended them for 10 years or longer.
In pilot testing, 94% of patients rated the tool easy or very easy to use, and 74% rated it helpful or very helpful.
Of 278 clinicians contacted nationwide, 54% (n = 130) could not be reached through publicly available contact information.
Interpretation
This crossover study followed 26 clinicians. Each took a baseline knowledge test, watched a short training video, attended a one-hour CME talk, then took the test again. They then used the shared decision-making tool with patients. Most were physicians (24 of 26) who already had experience with fertility awareness-based methods. The authors note that clinicians already recommended an average of 2.5 methods at baseline, leaving little room to show a rise in that number. The findings support larger studies of this training, including with clinicians newer to these methods.
RRM Context
Restorative reproductive medicine starts with a woman's charted cycle, so clinicians need to know charting methods well. Each method tracks different signs: cervical fluid, basal body temperature, or urinary hormones. The tool compares five methods, among them the Creighton Model and the Marquette Model. Training like this builds body literacy.
Our editorial summary of this paper, not the article's abstract.
Abstract
Objective
To assess the impact of a Shared Decision-Making (SDM) tool for fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) of family planning.
Methods
Clinicians familiar with at least one FABM were randomly invited to participate in a prospective cross-over study to compare usual practice to the use of the SDM tool when discussing FABMs with patients. Patients completed surveys pre- and post-office visit and six months later. The primary outcome explored the effect of online education on use of the SDM tool on clinicians' knowledge of FABMs.
Results
Of 278 clinicians contacted, 54% could not be reached, and 15% did not provide women's health services. The 26 clinicians enrolled were experienced, with more than half recommending FABMs for ≥10 years, and 73% recommending more than one FABM to patients. Knowledge scores significantly improved after online training and use of the SDM tool (baseline mean score = 9.54 (scale of 0-12); post-training mean score = 10.73, p < 0.002).
Conclusions
Education about FABMs and training on use of the SDM tool improved knowledge scores even among an experienced cohort of clinicians.
Innovation
The novel SDM tool can better equip clinicians to meet the rising patient interest in FABMs.
Research Methods › Study Design › Crossover Trials · Clinician Education and Training › Clinician Training › Professional Training · Contraception › Comparative Studies › Contraception Versus Fertility Awareness
Marguerite Duane, Virginia Martinez, Meghan Berry, Michael D Manhart
M Duane, V Martinez, M Berry, Mike Manhart, M Manhart
PMID 37213746 37213746 DOI 10.1016/j.pecinn.2022.100061 10.1016/j.pecinn.2022.100061 Duane et al. 2022, Duane 2022
