Literature DB >> 16322177

Initially misleading communication of carrier results after newborn genetic screening.

Alison La Pean1, Michael H Farrell.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Newborn screening saves lives, but the way in which parents learn of a positive screening test is also important for adherence with treatment plans and avoidance of psychosocial complications. The first messages provided to parents may be particularly important for understanding, especially when the infant is found to be a heterozygous carrier for sickle cell hemoglobinopathy (SCH) or cystic fibrosis (CF). This study investigated the prevalence of "initially misleading" communication, defined as the inclusion of 1 of 55 "bad-news" content items (eg, the screening test is positive) before any of 39 "good-news" content items (eg, the infant is healthy, normal, a carrier, or otherwise without problems).
METHODS: As part of a larger study of the content of counseling after newborn genetic screening, we used a quantitative, explicit-criteria method to abstract 59 transcribed conversations between pediatric residents and standardized parents of an "infant" who was found through newborn screening to carry either CF or SCH.
RESULTS: Of 59 transcripts, 41 were found to be misleading (at least 1 bad-news content statement before the first good-news content statement). There were significantly more misleading likely-CF-carrier than SCH-carrier transcripts (89.7% vs 50%). Among the misleading transcripts, the mean number of misleading statements was 5.5. The mean distance between the first bad-news and first good-news statements was 28.1 statements (20.5% of the total duration of counseling). DISCUSSION: The high prevalence of misleading content and the time lag before clarification does not bode well for parental understanding of infant carrier status. Future projects should improve curricula for training programs and develop quality-assurance efforts for community clinicians both to improve parental understanding and help assuage society's fears about the safety of genetic screening technologies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16322177     DOI: 10.1542/peds.2005-0449

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatrics        ISSN: 0031-4005            Impact factor:   7.124


  23 in total

1.  Improving communication between doctors and parents after newborn screening.

Authors:  Michael H Farrell; Stephanie A Christopher; Audrey Tluczek; Karen Kennedy-Parker; Alison La Pean; Kerry Eskra; Jenelle Collins; Gary Hoffman; Julie Panepinto; Philip M Farrell
Journal:  WMJ       Date:  2011-10

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.  Factors that influence parents' experiences with results disclosure after newborn screening identifies genetic carrier status for cystic fibrosis or sickle cell hemoglobinopathy.

Authors:  Jenelle L Collins; Alison La Pean; Faith O'Tool; Kerry L Eskra; Sara J Roedl; Audrey Tluczek; Michael H Farrell
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2012-01-11

Review 4.  Ethical issues with newborn screening in the genomics era.

Authors:  Beth A Tarini; Aaron J Goldenberg
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 8.929

5.  A structured implicit abstraction method to evaluate whether content of counseling before prostate cancer screening is consistent with recommendations by experts.

Authors:  Michael H Farrell; Evelyn C Y Chan; Lynnea K Ladouceur; Jeffrey M Stein
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2009-10-17

6.  A method to quantify residents' jargon use during counseling of standardized patients about cancer screening.

Authors:  Lindsay Deuster; Stephanie Christopher; Jodi Donovan; Michael Farrell
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-08-01       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  A method to quantify and compare clinicians' assessments of patient understanding during counseling of standardized patients.

Authors:  Michael H Farrell; Pramita Kuruvilla; Kerry L Eskra; Stephanie A Christopher; Rebecca S Brienza
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2009-04-19

8.  Informing parents about positive newborn screen results: parents' recommendations.

Authors:  Natalie Salm; Elena Yetter; Audrey Tluczek
Journal:  J Child Health Care       Date:  2012-09-14       Impact factor: 1.979

9.  Primary care providers' experiences notifying parents of cystic fibrosis newborn screening results.

Authors:  Caitlin Finan; Samya Z Nasr; Erin Rothwell; Beth A Tarini
Journal:  Clin Pediatr (Phila)       Date:  2014-08-06       Impact factor: 1.168

10.  A method to assess the organizing behaviors used in physicians' counseling of standardized parents after newborn genetic screening.

Authors:  Stephanie A Christopher; Nadia Y Ahmad; Lisa Bradford; Jenelle L Collins; Kerry Eskra; Alison la Pean Kirschner; Faith O O'Tool; Sara J Roedl; Michael H Farrell
Journal:  Commun Med       Date:  2012
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.