Literature DB >> 12748433

Offering preconceptional cystic fibrosis carrier couple screening in the absence of established preconceptional care services.

Lidewij Henneman1, Inge Bramsen, Linda van Kempen, Manita B van Acker, Gerard Pals, Henriette E van der Horst, Herman J Adèr, Henk M van der Ploeg, Leo P ten Kate.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the feasibility and acceptability of different modes of offering preconceptional carrier screening for cystic fibrosis (CF) in the absence of established preconceptional care services.
METHODS: Individuals aged 20-35 years were invited by mail, either by the Municipal Health Services (MHS) or by their own general practitioner (GP) to participate in a screening program with their partner. Pretest education was provided either during a group educational session or during a GP consultation. The reasons given by participants and nonrespondents for (not) responding to the invitation for screening, sociodemographic characteristics, and their attitudes were assessed by means of questionnaires.
RESULTS: Of 38,114 individuals who received a first invitation, approximately 20% had a partner with whom they were planning to have children. The response rate, as measured by attendance at either a group educational session or a GP consultation, was not affected by whether the letter was sent by the MHS or the person's GP. However, the response rate was about 2.5 times higher when the letter invited people to make an appointment with their GP for a consultation regarding CF carrier screening than when it invited them to attend an educational group session. A total of 559 couples (96%) consented to have the test after education. Repetition of the invitation increased the response. The main reason given by couples for not responding was "lack of time to attend" or "forgot about it" (48%). Another reason given was that they did not want to know their test results (28%). Eighty-nine percent of participants and 69% of nonrespondents believed that screening should be offered routinely to couples planning to have children. The GPs consulted (n = 18) reported no negative experiences, but due to the extra workload, 11 of them would not consider it to be part of their task.
CONCLUSIONS: Among couples planning to have children, there is generally a positive attitude towards routinely offering population-based CF carrier screening. Preconceptional CF carrier screening appeared feasible, both in terms of practical achievements and target group accessibility. Participation varied according to the pretest education setting, with the primary care setting producing the highest rate of attendance. Copyright 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12748433     DOI: 10.1159/000069540

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Community Genet        ISSN: 1422-2795


  14 in total

1.  Carrier screening in preconception consultation in primary care.

Authors:  Sylvia A Metcalfe
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2011-12-20

2.  Perceived relevance of genetic carrier screening: observations of the role of health-related life experiences and stage of life in decision making.

Authors:  Alison D Archibald; Belinda J McClaren
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2011-11-17

3.  "It gives them more options": preferences for preconception genetic carrier screening for fragile X syndrome in primary healthcare.

Authors:  Alison D Archibald; Chriselle L Hickerton; Samantha A Wake; Alice M Jaques; Jonathan Cohen; Sylvia A Metcalfe
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2016-02-03

4.  Attitudes of potential providers towards preconceptional cystic fibrosis carrier screening.

Authors:  Francis A M Poppelaars; Herman J Adèr; Martina C Cornel; Lidewij Henneman; Rosella P M G Hermens; Gerrit van der Wal; Leo P ten Kate
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  "Suddenly Having two Positive People who are Carriers is a Whole New Thing" - Experiences of Couples Both Identified as Carriers of Cystic Fibrosis Through a Population-Based Carrier Screening Program in Australia.

Authors:  Liane Ioannou; Martin B Delatycki; John Massie; Jan Hodgson; Sharon Lewis
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Attitudes of health care professionals toward carrier screening for cystic fibrosis. A review of the literature.

Authors:  S Janssens; A De Paepe; P Borry
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2012-12-29

7.  Attitudes of cystic fibrosis patients and parents toward carrier screening and related reproductive issues.

Authors:  Sandra Janssens; Davit Chokoshvilli; Carmen Binst; Inge Mahieu; Lidewij Henneman; Anne De Paepe; Pascal Borry
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 4.246

8.  Preconceptional ancestry-based carrier couple screening for cystic fibrosis and haemoglobinopathies: what determines the intention to participate or not and actual participation?

Authors:  Phillis Lakeman; Anne Marie Catharina Plass; Lidewij Henneman; Pieter Dirk Bezemer; Martina Cornelia Cornel; Leo Pieter ten Kate
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2009-02-18       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 9.  Preconception risk assessment for thalassaemia, sickle cell disease, cystic fibrosis and Tay-Sachs disease.

Authors:  Norita Hussein; Stephen F Weng; Joe Kai; Jos Kleijnen; Nadeem Qureshi
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-03-14

10.  Preconception counselling initiated by general practitioners in the Netherlands: reaching couples contemplating pregnancy [ISRCTN53942912].

Authors:  J Elsinga; Km van der Pal-de Bruin; S le Cessie; Lc de Jong-Potjer; Sp Verloove-Vanhorick; Wjj Assendelft
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2006-07-07       Impact factor: 2.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.