Literature DB >> 11817906

Very high compliance in an expanded MS-MS-based newborn screening program despite written parental consent.

Bernhard Liebl1, Uta Nennstiel-Ratzel, Rüdiger von Kries, Ralph Fingerhut, Bernhard Olgemöller, Andreas Zapf, Adelbert A Roscher.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: In Bavaria, Germany, an expanded MS-MS-based newborn screening program was implemented in 1999. The coverage of new additional conditions and novelty of technology required introduction of written parental consent. Here we evaluated the influence of the consent procedure on compliance by systematic demographic tracking.
METHODS: Comprehensive information was provided for parents, professionals, and the public. Screening notifications were matched with all birth notifications on name and date of birth. Parents of children without screening notification were contacted and counseled.
RESULTS: Between August 1, 1999, and July 31, 2000, 123,284 children eligible for screening were born. Of these, 116,652 were matched successfully. Among 6,632 parents contacted, 2,516 (2%) did not respond. Three thousand thirty-four children were screened but the parents initially refused to participate in tracking. Five hundred ninety-four were screened outside the program. Four hundred eighty-eight untested newborns were identified. Three hundred twenty-five screening failures due to logistic problems were tested subsequently. Screening was definitely refused by the parents of 163 children (0.1% of target population).
CONCLUSIONS: With appropriate information provided and surveillance by tracking, high compliance with newborn screening can be achieved despite a written consent requirement. Copyright 2001 American Health Foundation and Elsevier Science (USA).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11817906     DOI: 10.1006/pmed.2001.0952

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  10 in total

Review 1.  Data required for the evaluation of newborn screening programmes.

Authors:  Bernhard Liebl; Uta Nennstiel-Ratzel; Adelbert Roscher; Rüdiger von Kries
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2003-11-13       Impact factor: 3.183

2.  Parental views on informed consent for expanded newborn screening.

Authors:  Louise Moody; Kubra Choudhry
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2011-08-12       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Public views on participating in newborn screening using genome sequencing.

Authors:  Yvonne Bombard; Fiona A Miller; Robin Z Hayeems; Carolyn Barg; Celine Cressman; June C Carroll; Brenda J Wilson; Julian Little; Denise Avard; Michael Painter-Main; Judith Allanson; Yves Giguere; Pranesh Chakraborty
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  Acceptance of extended newborn screening: the problem of parental non-compliance.

Authors:  Adrian C Sewell; Boris Gebhardt; Jürgen Herwig; Ernst W Rauterberg
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 3.183

5.  Newborn screening in Canada - Are we out of step?

Authors:  William B Hanley
Journal:  Paediatr Child Health       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.253

6.  The expansion of newborn screening: is reproductive benefit an appropriate pursuit?

Authors:  Yvonne Bombard; Fiona A Miller; Robin Z Hayeems; Denise Avard; Bartha M Knoppers; Martina C Cornel; Pascal Borry
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 53.242

7.  Education and parental involvement in decision-making about newborn screening: understanding goals to clarify content.

Authors:  Beth K Potter; Holly Etchegary; Stuart G Nicholls; Brenda J Wilson; Samantha M Craigie; Makda H Araia
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-11-18       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 8.  Points to Consider: Ethical, Legal, and Psychosocial Implications of Genetic Testing in Children and Adolescents.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Botkin; John W Belmont; Jonathan S Berg; Benjamin E Berkman; Yvonne Bombard; Ingrid A Holm; Howard P Levy; Kelly E Ormond; Howard M Saal; Nancy B Spinner; Benjamin S Wilfond; Joseph D McInerney
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 11.025

9.  Neonatal screening of inborn errors of metabolism using tandem mass spectrometry: an evidence-based analysis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2003-05-01

10.  Neonatal Screening for Congenital Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders–Results From Germany for the Years 2006–2018.

Authors:  Anja Lüders; Oliver Blankenstein; Inken Brockow; Regina Ensenauer; Martin Lindner; Andreas Schulze; Uta Nennstiel
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 5.594

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.