Literature DB >> 21130549

'I want a choice, but I don't want to decide'--a qualitative study of pregnant women's experiences regarding early ultrasound risk assessment for chromosomal anomalies.

Ingvild Aune1, Anders Möller.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To increase our understanding of how pregnant women experience early ultrasound examination that includes a risk assessment for chromosomal anomalies and how such women perceive the test results. DESIGN/
SETTING: Qualitative study at St. Olavs Hospital in Norway. Both pre- and post-examination interviews were conducted with ten pregnant women who underwent risk assessment for chromosomal anomalies. Grounded theory was used to analyse the results.
FINDINGS: The study generated a core category (I want a choice, but I don't want to decide), which related to the conflict between choice and decision making. There were also five main categories (existential choices, search for knowledge, anxiety, feeling of guilt and counselling and care). The main categories describe the complex feelings experienced by the women regarding the risk assessment. Factors contributing to the difficulty of choice included loss of control and coping, emotional connection to the fetus and social pressure. As the women sought independent choices without any external influence, they also felt greater responsibility. The women's understanding of the actual risk varied, and they used different types of logic and methods to evaluate the risk and reach a decision.
CONCLUSIONS: The pregnant women in this study wanted prenatal diagnostic information and easy access to specialty services. Stress-related feelings and non-transparent information about the actual and perceived risks as well as personal moral judgments made the decision-making process complicated. Improved distribution of information and frequent contact with health professionals may help such women to make informed choices in accordance with their values and beliefs.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21130549     DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2010.10.015

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


  9 in total

1.  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

2.  The scope of prenatal diagnosis for women at increased risk for aneuploidies: views and preferences of professionals and potential users.

Authors:  Antina de Jong; Wybo J Dondorp; Anja Krumeich; Julie Boonekamp; Jan M M van Lith; Guido M W R de Wert
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2012-11-09

3.  Coping with worry while waiting for diagnostic results: a qualitative study of the experiences of pregnant couples following a high-risk prenatal screening result.

Authors:  Stina Lou; Camilla P Nielsen; Lone Hvidman; Olav B Petersen; Mette B Risør
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 3.007

4.  Role of Psychosocial Factors and Health Literacy in Pregnant Women's Intention to Use a Decision Aid for Down Syndrome Screening: A Theory-Based Web Survey.

Authors:  Agathe Delanoë; Johanie Lépine; Stéphane Turcotte; Maria Esther Leiva Portocarrero; Hubert Robitaille; Anik Mc Giguère; Brenda J Wilson; Holly O Witteman; Isabelle Lévesque; Laurence Guillaumie; France Légaré
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2016-10-28       Impact factor: 5.428

5.  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

6.  Integrating Combined First Trimester Screening for Preeclampsia into Routine Ultrasound Examination.

Authors:  Fabienne Trottmann; Anne Elena Mollet; Sofia Amylidi-Mohr; Daniel Surbek; Luigi Raio; Beatrice Mosimann
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2022-03-03       Impact factor: 2.915

7.  How do Midwives and Physicians Discuss Childhood Vaccination with Parents?

Authors:  Eve Dubé; Maryline Vivion; Chantal Sauvageau; Arnaud Gagneur; Raymonde Gagnon; Maryse Guay
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 4.241

8.  Facilitating autonomous, confident and satisfying choices: a mixed-method study of women's choice-making in prenatal screening for common aneuploidies.

Authors:  An Chen; Henni Tenhunen; Paulus Torkki; Antti Peltokorpi; Seppo Heinonen; Paul Lillrank; Vedran Stefanovic
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 3.007

9.  Viewing the image? Ultrasound examination during abortion preparations, ethical challenges.

Authors:  Marianne Kjelsvik; Ragnhild Jt Sekse; Elin M Aasen; Eva Gjengedal
Journal:  Nurs Ethics       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 2.874

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.