Literature DB >> 15932829

Impact of self-reported familiarity with guidelines for cystic fibrosis carrier screening.

Maria A Morgan1, Deborah A Driscoll, Stanley Zinberg, Jay Schulkin, Michael T Mennuti.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of self-reported familiarity with published guidelines on knowledge, implementation, and opinions of obstetrician-gynecologists regarding carrier screening for cystic fibrosis.
METHODS: A questionnaire pertaining to cystic fibrosis screening guidelines was mailed to 1,165 members of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.
RESULTS: Sixty-four percent of questionnaires were returned. Statistical analyses were limited to the 632 respondents whose primary medical specialty was gynecology (GynOnly) or obstetrics and gynecology (ObGyns). More ObGyns had thoroughly read or skimmed the guidelines (67.1%) than had GynOnlys (41.6%). Correctly responding to basic questions regarding cystic fibrosis was associated with having read the guidelines, although responding to a more complex question was not. Familiarity with the guidelines was associated with correctly identifying the recommendations for offering screening, with practice implementation of cystic fibrosis screening, and with self-ratings of qualifications and training to offer screening and to provide counseling. In contrast, familiarity with the guidelines was not associated with ObGyn's opinion that burden of disease is likely to be influential in patient acceptance of screening. Physicians who had thoroughly read the guidelines were more likely to disagree that the cystic fibrosis screening test is too inaccurate to risk influencing reproductive decision making (thoroughly read = 79% disagree, skimmed = 69%, not read = 58%, not heard of it = 50%).
CONCLUSION: There was a strong association between self-reported familiarity with the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists/American College of Medical Genetics guidelines and physicians' knowledge, implementation, and ratings of training for offering cystic fibrosis carrier screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15932829     DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000163251.54416.a6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  6 in total

1.  Interactions of doctors with the pharmaceutical industry.

Authors:  M A Morgan; J Dana; G Loewenstein; S Zinberg; J Schulkin
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  Clinician perspectives about molecular genetic testing for heritable conditions and development of a clinician-friendly laboratory report.

Authors:  Ira M Lubin; Margaret M McGovern; Zoe Gibson; Susan J Gross; Elaine Lyon; Roberta A Pagon; Victoria M Pratt; Jamila Rashid; Colleen Shaw; Lander Stoddard; Tracy L Trotter; Marc S Williams; Jean Amos Wilson; Kenneth Pass
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2009-02-05       Impact factor: 5.568

3.  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

4.  Ordering molecular genetic tests and reporting results: practices in laboratory and clinical settings.

Authors:  Ira M Lubin; Michele Caggana; Carolyn Constantin; Susan J Gross; Elaine Lyon; Roberta A Pagon; Tracy L Trotter; Jean Amos Wilson; Margaret M McGovern
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2008-07-31       Impact factor: 5.568

5.  Why is genetic screening for autosomal dominant disorders underused in families? The case of hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia.

Authors:  Barbara A Bernhardt; Cara Zayac; Reed E Pyeritz
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 8.822

6.  Health practitioners' perceptions of the barriers and enablers to the implementation of reproductive genetic carrier screening: A systematic review.

Authors:  Stephanie Best; Janet Long; Tahlia Theodorou; Sarah Hatem; Rebecca Lake; Alison Archibald; Lucinda Freeman; Jeffrey Braithwaite
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 3.050

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.