Literature DB >> 21299502

Socio-demographic disparities in the uptake of prenatal screening and diagnosis in Western Australia.

Susannah Maxwell1, Kate Brameld, Carol Bower, Jan E Dickinson, Jack Goldblatt, Narelle Hadlow, Bev Hewitt, Ashleigh Murch, Anthony Murphy, Roseanne Stock, Peter O'Leary.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Since the early 1980s, prenatal screening using ultrasound and biochemical markers has been used to refine the risk of Down syndrome and other fetal anomalies prior to considering fetal karyotyping. The performance of prenatal screening is subject to ongoing monitoring in Western Australia. The collection of these data can also assist in the identification of any potential inequities of access to prenatal screening within the state-wide programme.
METHODS: Prenatal screening data (2005-2006) were collected from accredited ultrasound and pathology laboratories in Western Australia. Screening data were linked to diagnostic and pregnancy outcome data. Performance characteristics of screening and uptake by socio-demographic characteristics were analysed.
RESULTS: Complete screening data were collected for 35,142 of the estimated 38,081 women screened during 2005 and 2006. There were 59,999 births related to this screening period. The lowest uptake of screening was among women who were Aboriginal (14.9%), living in remote areas (38.0%), under the age of 25 (40.2%), in the lowest quintile of the SEIFA index (41.6%) and with three or more children (48.4%). Logistic regression analysis showed all socio-demographic factors to be strongly associated with screening behaviour, with adjustment for ethnicity, socio-economic status, age, parity and area of residence. DISCUSSION: Our results have important implications for the delivery of prenatal screening services in Western Australia. While the screening programme meets international and national performance standards, the disparities in screening uptake suggest inequity in access to services, particularly for Aboriginal, remote and socio-economically disadvantaged women.
© 2010 The Authors. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology © 2010 The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21299502     DOI: 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2010.01250.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol        ISSN: 0004-8666            Impact factor:   2.100


  15 in total

1.  Rates of prenatal screening across health care regions in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Robin Z Hayeems; Michael Campitelli; Xiaomu Ma; Tianhua Huang; Mark Walker; Astrid Guttmann
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2015-04-02

Review 2.  First trimester ultrasound tests alone or in combination with first trimester serum tests for Down's syndrome screening.

Authors:  S Kate Alldred; Yemisi Takwoingi; Boliang Guo; Mary Pennant; Jonathan J Deeks; James P Neilson; Zarko Alfirevic
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-03-15

3.  Women's Understanding and Attitudes towards Down Syndrome and Other Genetic Conditions in the Context of Prenatal Screening.

Authors:  Sarah Long; Peter O'Leary; Roanna Lobo; Jan E Dickinson
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-10-24       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Impact of Educational Interventions on Knowledge About Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy Among Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Kosar Gholami; Narges Norouzkhani; Meraj Kargar; Hamidreza Ghasemirad; Atieh Jafarabadi Ashtiani; Shamim Kiani; Mahdi Sajedi Far; Maryam Dianati; Yasaman Salimi; Amirmohammad Khalaji; Sara Honari; Niloofar Deravi
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-06-20

5.  Disparities in reported psychosocial assessment across public and private maternity settings: a national survey of women in Australia.

Authors:  Nicole Reilly; Sheree Harris; Deborah Loxton; Catherine Chojenta; Peta Forder; Jeannette Milgrom; Marie-Paule Austin
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 3.295

6.  Prenatal diagnosis in Sweden 2011 to 2013-a register-based study.

Authors:  Kerstin Petersson; Marie Lindkvist; Margareta Persson; Peter Conner; Annika Åhman; Ingrid Mogren
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-11-22       Impact factor: 3.007

7.  Prenatal screening for congenital anomalies: exploring midwives' perceptions of counseling clients with religious backgrounds.

Authors:  Janneke T Gitsels-van der Wal; Judith Manniën; Lisanne A Gitsels; Hans S Reinders; Pieternel S Verhoeven; Mohammed M Ghaly; Trudy Klomp; Eileen K Hutton
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-07-19       Impact factor: 3.007

8.  Factors affecting the uptake of prenatal screening tests for congenital anomalies; a multicentre prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Janneke T Gitsels-van der Wal; Pieternel S Verhoeven; Judith Manniën; Linda Martin; Hans S Reinders; Evelien Spelten; Eileen K Hutton
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2014-08-09       Impact factor: 3.007

9.  Women's perceptions of antenatal care: are we following guideline recommended care?

Authors:  Amy Waller; Jamie Bryant; Emilie Cameron; Mohamed Galal; Juliana Quay; Rob Sanson-Fisher
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 3.007

10.  Factors associated with utilization of maternal serum screening for Down syndrome in mainland China: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Chuanlin Li; Leiyu Shi; Jiayan Huang; Xu Qian; Yingyao Chen
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.