Literature DB >> 16098850

Evidence-based obstetric ethics and informed decision-making by pregnant women about invasive diagnosis after first-trimester assessment of risk for trisomy 21.

Kypros H Nicolaides1, Frank A Chervenak, Laurence B McCullough, Kyriaki Avgidou, Aris Papageorghiou.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the ability of pregnant women to incorporate sophisticated screening information about risk assessment into their decisions about invasive testing in an appropriate way. STUDY
DESIGN: Assessment of risk for trisomy 21 was carried out by a combination of maternal age, fetal nuchal translucency (NT) thickness, and maternal serum free beta-human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) and pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) at 11 to 13+6 weeks. The patients were counseled with regards to their estimated risk, and were informed that the only way to know for sure whether or not the fetus has a chromosomal abnormality is by having an invasive test, but these tests carry a risk of miscarriage of about 1%. They were also informed that although a risk of 1 in 300 or more was generally considered to be high, it was up to them to decide in favor or against invasive testing.
RESULTS: Assessment of risk was carried out in 30,564 singleton pregnancies with live fetuses at 11 to 13+6. The median maternal age was 34 (range 15-49) years and, in 14,816 (48.5%), the age was 35 years or greater. The rate of invasive testing increased exponentially with increasing estimated risk (r = 0.917, P < .0001). The estimated risk for trisomy 21 was 1 in 300 or more in 2565 (8.4%) women, and 1991 (77.6%) of these had invasive testing. The risk was less than 1 in 300 in 27,999 (91.6%) women, and 1286 (4.6%) of these had invasive testing.
CONCLUSION: Pregnant women are able to use sophisticated screening information to make scientifically and ethically rational decisions about invasive testing for trisomy 21. These empiric data compliment the arguments of normative ethics to create evidence-based ethical standards for informed consent regarding invasive testing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16098850     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2005.02.134

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0002-9378            Impact factor:   8.661


  7 in total

1.  Does labeling prenatal screening test results as negative or positive affect a woman's responses?

Authors:  Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Angela Fagerlin; Kristie Keeton; Peter A Ubel
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-09-19       Impact factor: 8.661

2.  "I think we've got too many tests!": Prenatal providers' reflections on ethical and clinical challenges in the practice integration of cell-free DNA screening.

Authors:  B L Gammon; S A Kraft; M Michie; M Allyse
Journal:  Ethics Med Public Health       Date:  2016 Jul-Sep

3.  DNA sequencing of maternal plasma reliably identifies trisomy 18 and trisomy 13 as well as Down syndrome: an international collaborative study.

Authors:  Glenn E Palomaki; Cosmin Deciu; Edward M Kloza; Geralyn M Lambert-Messerlian; James E Haddow; Louis M Neveux; Mathias Ehrich; Dirk van den Boom; Allan T Bombard; Wayne W Grody; Stanley F Nelson; Jacob A Canick
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2012-02-02       Impact factor: 8.822

4.  Influence of place of residence on indications for genetic amniocentesis in the Pomeranian region of Poland before and after introduction of the Prenatal Screening Program in 2008.

Authors:  Katarzyna Ciach; Małgorzata Swiatkowska-Freund; Krzysztof Preis
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2014-05-02

Review 5.  Current principles and practice of ethics and law in perinatal medicine.

Authors:  C Berceanu; Simona Elena Albu; Mihaela BoȚ; M Șt Ghelase
Journal:  Curr Health Sci J       Date:  2014-08-04

6.  Considering medical risk information and communicating values: A mixed-method study of women's choice in prenatal testing.

Authors:  An Chen; Henni Tenhunen; Paulus Torkki; Seppo Heinonen; Paul Lillrank; Vedran Stefanovic
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  A contingent model for cell-free DNA testing to detect fetal aneuploidy after first trimester combined screening.

Authors:  Carmen Cotarelo-Pérez; Raluca Oancea-Ionescu; Eloy Asenjo-de-la-Fuente; Dolores Ortega-de-Heredia; Patricia Soler-Ruiz; Pluvio Coronado-Martín; María Fenollar-Cortés
Journal:  Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X       Date:  2019-01-15
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.