Literature DB >> 17547916

First-trimester combined screening: experience with an instant results approach.

Mary E Norton1, Linda M Hopkins, Sherri Pena, David Krantz, Aaron B Caughey.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to assess an instant results protocol for first-trimester combined screening. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of patients having first-trimester combined screening between Nov. 1, 2003 and Oct. 31, 2005. We evaluated the feasibility of patient self-collection and mail-in of blood samples before nuchal translucency ultrasound. Primary outcome was success with providing in-office, immediate screening results after the ultrasound. Predictor variables included age, ethnicity, insurance, and provider. The chi2 analysis was performed.
RESULTS: Two thousand three hundred ten women completed first-trimester combined screening, and 60.6% received instant results. When the biochemistry sample was collected at home, 80% received instant results. Age 35 years or older predicted instant results (P = .001), whereas ethnicity, insurance, and referring provider did not. Comparing the prior 24 months, clinic volume increased by 18%. Diagnostic procedure volume was unchanged, although chorionic villus sampling increased by 12% (P = .02) and amniocentesis decreased by 6% (P = .049).
CONCLUSION: Patients were able to obtain instant results in 60.6% of cases, which appeared to increase the use of chorionic villus sampling.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17547916      PMCID: PMC2099455          DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2007.03.019

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


  11 in total

1.  Genetic counseling gone awry: miscommunication between prenatal genetic service providers and Mexican-origin clients.

Authors:  C H Browner; H Mabel Preloran; Maria Christina Casado; Harold N Bass; Ann P Walker
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.634

2.  First and second trimester antenatal screening for Down's syndrome: the results of the Serum, Urine and Ultrasound Screening Study (SURUSS).

Authors:  N J Wald; C Rodeck; A K Hackshaw; J Walters; L Chitty; A M Mackinson
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.136

3.  Low uptake of prenatal screening for Down syndrome in minority ethnic groups and socially deprived groups: a reflection of women's attitudes or a failure to facilitate informed choices?

Authors:  Elizabeth Dormandy; Susan Michie; Richard Hooper; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2005-02-28       Impact factor: 7.196

4.  Beyond race or ethnicity and socioeconomic status: predictors of prenatal testing for Down syndrome.

Authors:  Miriam Kuppermann; Lee A Learman; Elena Gates; Steven E Gregorich; Robert F Nease; James Lewis; A Eugene Washington
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  First-trimester or second-trimester screening, or both, for Down's syndrome.

Authors:  Fergal D Malone; Jacob A Canick; Robert H Ball; David A Nyberg; Christine H Comstock; Radek Bukowski; Richard L Berkowitz; Susan J Gross; Lorraine Dugoff; Sabrina D Craigo; Ilan E Timor-Tritsch; Stephen R Carr; Honor M Wolfe; Kimberly Dukes; Diana W Bianchi; Alicja R Rudnicka; Allan K Hackshaw; Geralyn Lambert-Messerlian; Nicholas J Wald; Mary E D'Alton
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-11-10       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Nuchal translucency and first trimester biochemical markers for down syndrome screening: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Aaron B Caughey; Miriam Kuppermann; Mary E Norton; A Eugene Washington
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  Abortion attitudes of pregnant women in prenatal care.

Authors:  Lee A Learman; Eleanor A Drey; Elena A Gates; Mi-Suk Kang; A Eugene Washington; Miriam Kuppermann
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 8.661

8.  UK multicentre project on assessment of risk of trisomy 21 by maternal age and fetal nuchal-translucency thickness at 10-14 weeks of gestation. Fetal Medicine Foundation First Trimester Screening Group.

Authors:  R J Snijders; P Noble; N Sebire; A Souka; K H Nicolaides
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-08-01       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Characteristics of women who refuse an offer of prenatal diagnosis: data from the California maternal serum alpha fetoprotein blood test experience.

Authors:  N Press; C H Browner
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1998-08-06

10.  First-trimester screening for trisomies 21 and 18.

Authors:  Ronald Wapner; Elizabeth Thom; Joe Leigh Simpson; Eugene Pergament; Richard Silver; Karen Filkins; Lawrence Platt; Maurice Mahoney; Anthony Johnson; W Allen Hogge; R Douglas Wilson; Patrick Mohide; Douglas Hershey; David Krantz; Julia Zachary; Rosalinde Snijders; Naomi Greene; Rudy Sabbagha; Scott MacGregor; Lyndon Hill; Alain Gagnon; Terrence Hallahan; Laird Jackson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-10-09       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  1 in total

1.  Early pregnancy prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus risk using prenatal screening biomarkers in nulliparous women.

Authors:  Brittney M Snyder; Rebecca J Baer; Scott P Oltman; Jennifer G Robinson; Patrick J Breheny; Audrey F Saftlas; Wei Bao; Andrea L Greiner; Knute D Carter; Larry Rand; Laura L Jelliffe-Pawlowski; Kelli K Ryckman
Journal:  Diabetes Res Clin Pract       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 5.602

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.