Literature DB >> 15495068

Disclosing to parents newborn carrier status identified by routine blood spot screening.

S Oliver1, C Dezateux, J Kavanagh, T Lempert, R Stewart.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Newborn blood spot screening programmes are designed to detect serious conditions affecting individuals, where early treatment can improve health. It is suggested that screening can improve the experience of diagnosis for parents. For example, without newborn screening, when a child with cystic fibrosis becomes symptomatic a period of uncertainty can arise prior to diagnosis. These potential advantages of screening need to be weighed against potential disadvantages of screening at individual and population levels. Some newborn screening programmes inadvertently identify newborn infants who, although not affected by the condition, carry a gene for it and can pass on that gene to their children; these are 'genetic carriers'. Knowledge of newborn carrier status can lead to: testing of parents and family members, and concern about possible affected future siblings should both parents be identified as carriers; the possibility of such testing revealing the putative father is not the biological father; concern about the child's future reproductive choices; and unjustified anxiety about the health of the carrier newborn. There is an urgent need to develop clear guidance as to how to respond, with advances in technology fuelling the expansion of newborn blood spot screening and raised expectations of informed consent and disclosing test results. Depending on the condition for which screening is offered, options include: employing tests that do not identify carrier status, if available; identifying acceptable ways of disclosing carrier status; or identifying acceptable ways of not disclosing carrier status. These options are illustrated by screening programmes for sickle cell disorders and cystic fibrosis. Currently, there are no screening tests available for sickle cell disorders that do not identify carrier status. For cystic fibrosis, the policy choice is between an extended period of testing, and a screening result that is available sooner for most newborns, but inadvertently identifies carrier babies.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review was to assess the impact of disclosing to parents newborn carrier status inadvertently identified by routine newborn blood spot screening. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched for reports addressing disclosing newborn carrier status to parents following newborn screening for sickle cell disorders and cystic fibrosis in: commercially available electronic databases (October 2002), specialist registers, online journals, online abstracts and conference abstracts. We also scanned the reference lists of included papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies addressing the impact of disclosing carrier status using a soundly controlled trial or randomised controlled trial. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two researchers independently scanned titles and abstracts for relevance using the pre-specified inclusion criteria. Full reports of selected citations were then located and screened again for relevance by two researchers independently. At each stage, results were compared and discrepancies resolved by discussion. MAIN
RESULTS: We found no controlled trials about disclosing carrier status. REVIEWERS'
CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to develop and evaluate the effects of interventions to support the disclosure of carrier status to parents following newborn screening.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15495068     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003859.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  17 in total

1.  Questioning the consensus: managing carrier status results generated by newborn screening.

Authors:  Fiona Alice Miller; Jason Scott Robert; Robin Z Hayeems
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2008-12-04       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 2.  A systematic review of the effects of disclosing carrier results generated through newborn screening.

Authors:  R Z Hayeems; J P Bytautas; F A Miller
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2008-10-28       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Carrier detection and clinical uncertainty: the case for public health ethics.

Authors:  Fiona Alice Miller; Robin Z Hayeems; Jason Scott Robert
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Newborn screening: complexities in universal genetic testing.

Authors:  Nancy S Green; Siobhan M Dolan; Thomas H Murray
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-03-29       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Disparities in current and future childhood and newborn carrier identification.

Authors:  Melissa Noke; Alison Wearden; Sarah Peters; Fiona Ulph
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-07-11       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Effort required to contact primary care providers after newborn screening identifies sickle cell trait.

Authors:  Stephanie A Christopher; Jenelle L Collins; Michael H Farrell
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  2012 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.798

7.  Parents' experiences of universal screening for haemoglobin disorders: implications for practice in a new genetics era.

Authors:  Louise Locock; Joe Kai
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 8.  Newborn screening for cystic fibrosis: a lesson in public health disparities.

Authors:  Lainie Friedman Ross
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 4.406

9.  Understanding sickle cell carrier status identified through newborn screening: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Fiona A Miller; Martha Paynter; Robin Z Hayeems; Julian Little; June C Carroll; Brenda J Wilson; Judith Allanson; Jessica P Bytautas; Pranesh Chakraborty
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2009-10-07       Impact factor: 4.246

10.  Using formative research to develop a counselor training program for newborn screening in Ghana.

Authors:  Marsha J Treadwell; Kofi A Anie; Althea M Grant; Solomon F Ofori-Acquah; Kwaku Ohene-Frempong
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-09-07       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.