Literature DB >> 19731471

Adjunct prenatal testing: patient decisions regarding ethnic carrier screening and fluorescence in situ hybridization.

Erica L Sturm1, Kelly E Ormond.   

Abstract

Little has been reported regarding how women make decisions about genetic carrier screening for Ashkenazi Jewish genetic disease and cystic fibrosis (CF), and for fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) during pregnancy. Thirty-seven women who underwent genetic counseling and prenatal diagnosis were interviewed about their prenatal decision making. Respondents were largely Caucasian (95%), and undergoing prenatal diagnosis because of maternal age (78%). Sixty-three percent of those who reported having genetic carrier screening correctly defined it; 83% felt positively about it. Primary reasons reported for electing screening were: to get information, to be prepared, perception of risk, wanting peace of mind and percieved inability to care for an affected child. Women who declined screening felt they had very little or no risk, and some were deterred by cost. Ninety-five percent of respondents elected to have FISH; most were motivated by its speed in providing information and peace of mind or by timing of when the procedure was performed. Those who declined FISH reported being less concerned about having an affected child, receiving bad news, or waiting 2 weeks for results and slightly less affected by their "feelings toward medical testing" or physician's suggestion. These findings suggest decision-making factors differ between those electing and declining adjunct prenatal testing and increased knowledge about these factors may impact the way in which these services are offered by health care professionals. Prospective research with a larger population will be useful in further delineating the factors that influence prenatal decisions about adjunct testing measures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 19731471     DOI: 10.1023/b:jogc.0000013194.53410.6f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Genet Couns        ISSN: 1059-7700            Impact factor:   2.537


  15 in total

1.  Prenatal tests: how are women deciding?

Authors:  S Michie; D Smith; T M Marteau
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 3.050

Review 2.  The new genetics. Psychological responses to genetic testing.

Authors:  T M Marteau; R T Croyle
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-02-28

3.  Effect of framing on the perception of genetic recurrence risks.

Authors:  S Shiloh; M Sagi
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1989-05

4.  Antenatal screening for carriers of cystic fibrosis: randomised trial of stepwise v couple screening.

Authors:  Z H Miedzybrodzka; M H Hall; J Mollison; A Templeton; I T Russell; J C Dean; K F Kelly; T M Marteau; N E Haites
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-02-11

5.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice.

Authors:  A Tversky; D Kahneman
Journal:  Science       Date:  1981-01-30       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Ethnicity, bioethics, and prenatal diagnosis: the amniocentesis decisions of Mexican-origin women and their partners.

Authors:  C H Browner; H M Preloran; S J Cox
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 9.308

7.  Decisions about amniocentesis by advanced maternal age patients following maternal serum screening may not always correlate clinically with screening results: need for improvement in informed consent process.

Authors:  Tina Marini; Jan Sullivan; Rizwan Naeem
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  2002-05-01

8.  The clinical application of interphase FISH in prenatal diagnosis.

Authors:  E Pergament; P X Chen; M Thangavelu; M Fiddler
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 3.050

9.  Factors influencing maternal estimates of genetic risk.

Authors:  E E Ekwo; B F Seals; J O Kim; R A Williamson; J W Hanson
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1985-03

10.  Women's knowledge of prenatal ultrasound and informed choice.

Authors:  Ruth J Kohut; Deborah Dewey; Edgar J Love
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.537

View more
  1 in total

1.  Difference in Perception of Pregnancy Risk in Two Maternal Age Groups.

Authors:  Ziba Taghizadeh; Mohammad Ali Cheraghi; Anoshirvan Kazemnejad; Jalal Pooralajal; Soodabeh Aghababaei
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-05-01
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.