Literature DB >> 18295382

'This is just what you do when you are pregnant': a qualitative study of prospective parents in Iceland who accept nuchal translucency screening.

Helga Gottfredsdóttir1, Jane Sandall, Kristín Björnsdóttir.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: nuchal translucency (NT) screening, mainly for Down's syndrome, in the first trimester of pregnancy is becoming an established practice in many countries. However, very little is known about parents' knowledge and beliefs prior to undergoing screening. Such information is essential to form guidelines regarding informed decision-making.
OBJECTIVES: to explore the influences on prospective parents' decision-making in relation to NT screening in early pregnancy, and to gain insight into how the views of prospective mothers and fathers towards the benefits and implications of screening may differ.
DESIGN: a qualitative study using framework analysis based on a grounded theory approach. PARTICIPANTS: 10 couples, who had decided to have NT screening, were recruited from four community health centres in Iceland. All pregnancies were defined as 'low risk' for fetal anomaly. DATA COLLECTION: semi-structured interviews were conducted separately with each prospective mother and father at 7-11 weeks and again at 20-24 weeks of gestation. In total, 40 interviews were conducted.
FINDINGS: the majority of prospective mothers in this study had already decided to accept NT screening before they entered the public antenatal care system. The decision to accept screening seemed to lie with the prospective mother and had hardly been discussed by the couple. Differences between prospective mothers and fathers were observed in relation to the expression of expectations towards the benefits of screening and the perception of disability, which is of interest in the context of information provided to prospective parents. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: the findings from this study are of interest to clinicians and policy makers forming future guidelines for antenatal care both in Iceland and further afield. It highlights the need for information for prospective parents to be in the public domain prior to their contact with maternity services. Additionally, findings add to knowledge of prospective fathers in early pregnancy regarding how their perceptions of disability may contribute to the couple's decision to accept screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18295382     DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2007.12.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Midwifery        ISSN: 0266-6138            Impact factor:   2.372


  9 in total

1.  Bioethical concepts in theory and practice: an exploratory study of prenatal screening in Iceland.

Authors:  Helga Gottfreðsdóttir; Vilhjálmur Arnason
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2011-02

2.  Decision-making process of prenatal screening described by pregnant women and their partners.

Authors:  Inger Wätterbjörk; Karin Blomberg; Kerstin Nilsson; Eva Sahlberg-Blom
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 3.377

3.  Why do pregnant women accept or decline prenatal diagnosis for Down syndrome?

Authors:  Ellen Ternby; Ove Axelsson; Göran Annerén; Peter Lindgren; Charlotta Ingvoldstad
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2016-07-20

4.  Men's Knowledge About Maternal Serum Screening for Down Syndrome and their Attitude Towards Amniocentesis.

Authors:  Bojana Brajenović-Milić; Tamara Martinac Dorčić
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Obstetric professionals' perceptions of non-invasive prenatal testing for Down syndrome: clinical usefulness compared with existing tests and ethical implications.

Authors:  Olivia Miu Yung Ngan; Huso Yi; Samuel Yeung Shan Wong; Daljit Sahota; Shenaz Ahmed
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  A Framework for Describing the Influence of Service Organisation and Delivery on Participation in Fetal Anomaly Screening in England.

Authors:  Hyacinth O Ukuhor; Janet Hirst; S José Closs; William J Montelpare
Journal:  J Pregnancy       Date:  2017-03-22

7.  Experiences and expectations in the first trimester of pregnancy: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Stina Lou; Michal Frumer; Mette M Schlütter; Olav B Petersen; Ida Vogel; Camilla P Nielsen
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2017-05-18       Impact factor: 3.377

8.  First and second trimester ultrasound in pregnancy: A systematic review and metasynthesis of the views and experiences of pregnant women, partners, and health workers.

Authors:  Gill Moncrieff; Kenneth Finlayson; Sarah Cordey; Rebekah McCrimmon; Catherine Harris; Maria Barreix; Özge Tunçalp; Soo Downe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-12-14       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Reasons for accepting or declining Down syndrome screening in Dutch prospective mothers within the context of national policy and healthcare system characteristics: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Neeltje M T H Crombag; Hennie Boeije; Rita Iedema-Kuiper; Peter C J I Schielen; Gerard H A Visser; Jozien M Bensing
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 3.007

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.