Literature DB >> 11015697

How women deal with the results of serum screening for Down syndrome in the second trimester of pregnancy.

M J Weinans1, A M Huijssoon, T Tymstra, M C Gerrits, J R Beekhuis, A Mantingh.   

Abstract

To gain insight into how pregnant women experience serum screening for Down syndrome, we sent questionnaires to two groups of relevant subjects in the north of the Netherlands. The questionnaires addressed the following issues: decision-making process, knowledge and opinions. Questionnaire A was sent to women of 36 years of age and older (n=99) (group A) who were all 20 to 36 weeks pregnant at that time. In the Netherlands prenatal diagnosis is routinely available to these women. Questionnaire B was sent to women of younger than 36 years (n=69) (group B) who had received a screen-positive result and had subsequently undergone amniocentesis. About half of these women were still pregnant at that time. For these women, serum screening is only available on the basis of opting-in. The two questionnaires were largely identical. The response rates to questionnaires A and B were 82% and 91%, respectively. Group A (women of 36 years and older) considered that second trimester serum screening made a welcome contribution to the decision-making process about whether to undergo amniocentesis. Moreover, it reduced the amniocentesis rate considerably. The vast majority said they would apply for serum screening in a following pregnancy, but favoured the idea of first trimester screening. In group B (women of younger than 36 years), reassurance was the most commonly mentioned reason for undergoing serum screening. Almost all the women experienced some degree of anxiety when they were informed about the screen-positive result and 13% continued to be anxious, even after the favourable result of the amniocentesis. The majority of the respondents would also apply for serum screening in a following pregnancy and were of the opinion that this screening should be offered to all pregnant women in the Netherlands. Copyright 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11015697     DOI: 10.1002/1097-0223(200009)20:9<705::aid-pd904>3.0.co;2-c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prenat Diagn        ISSN: 0197-3851            Impact factor:   3.050


  7 in total

1.  Informed choice of pregnant women in prenatal screening tests for Down's syndrome.

Authors:  H-H Chiang; Y-M Yu Chao; Y-S Yuh
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  A survey on awareness of genetic counseling for non-invasive prenatal testing: the first year experience in Japan.

Authors:  Junko Yotsumoto; Akihiko Sekizawa; Nobuhiro Suzumori; Takahiro Yamada; Osamu Samura; Miyuki Nishiyama; Kiyonori Miura; Hideaki Sawai; Jun Murotsuki; Michihiro Kitagawa; Yoshimasa Kamei; Hideaki Masuzaki; Fumiki Hirahara; Toshiaki Endo; Akimune Fukushima; Akira Namba; Hisao Osada; Yasuyo Kasai; Atsushi Watanabe; Yukiko Katagiri; Naoki Takeshita; Masaki Ogawa; Takashi Okai; Shunichiro Izumi; Haruka Hamanoue; Mayuko Inuzuka; Kazufumi Haino; Naoki Hamajima; Haruki Nishizawa; Yoko Okamoto; Hiroaki Nakamura; Takeshi Kanegawa; Jun Yoshimatsu; Shinya Tairaku; Katsuhiko Naruse; Hisashi Masuyama; Maki Hyodo; Takashi Kaji; Kazuhisa Maeda; Keiichi Matsubara; Masanobu Ogawa; Toshiyuki Yoshizato; Takashi Ohba; Yukie Kawano; Haruhiko Sago
Journal:  J Hum Genet       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 3.172

3.  Prenatal diagnosis for paediatricians.

Authors:  Anne Summers
Journal:  Paediatr Child Health       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 2.253

Review 4.  A systematic review of decision support needs of parents making child health decisions.

Authors:  Cath Jackson; Francine M Cheater; Innes Reid
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 3.377

5.  Impact of increased risk for fetal aneuploidy on maternal mood: a prospective longitudinal study.

Authors:  Dayna L Nevay; Catriona Hippman; Angela Inglis; Arianne Albert; Jehannine Austin
Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand       Date:  2016-08-17       Impact factor: 3.636

6.  Depression during pregnancy: the potential impact of increased risk for fetal aneuploidy on maternal mood.

Authors:  C Hippman; T F Oberlander; W G Honer; S Misri; J C Austin
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2008-07-14       Impact factor: 4.438

7.  Genetic screening and democracy: lessons from debating genetic screening criteria in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Carla Geertruida van El; Toine Pieters; Martina Cornel
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2011-08-30
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.