Literature DB >> 21671303

The choice of detecting Down syndrome: does money matter?

Clémentine Garrouste1, Jérôme Le, Eric Maurin.   

Abstract

The prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome (amniocentesis) presents parents with a complex dilemma which requires comparing the risk of giving birth to an affected child and the risk of losing an unaffected child through amniocentesis-related miscarriage. Building on the specific features of the French Health insurance system, this paper shows that variation in the monetary costs of the diagnosis procedure may have a very significant impact on how parents solve this ethical dilemma. The French institutions make it possible to compare otherwise similar women facing very different reimbursement schemes and we find that eligibility to full reimbursement has a largely positive effect on the probability of taking an amniocentesis test. By contrast, the sole fact of being labelled 'high-risk' by the Health system seems to have, as such, only a modest effect on subsequent choices. Finally, building on available information on post-amniocentesis outcomes, we report new evidence suggesting that amniocentesis increases the risk of premature birth and low weight at birth.
Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21671303     DOI: 10.1002/hec.1762

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Econ        ISSN: 1057-9230            Impact factor:   3.046


  3 in total

1.  Explaining variation in Down's syndrome screening uptake: comparing the Netherlands with England and Denmark using documentary analysis and expert stakeholder interviews.

Authors:  Neeltje M T H Crombag; Ynke E Vellinga; Sandra A Kluijfhout; Louise D Bryant; Pat A Ward; Rita Iedema-Kuiper; Peter C J I Schielen; Jozien M Bensing; Gerard H A Visser; Ann Tabor; Janet Hirst
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 2.655

2.  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

3.  Should pregnant women be charged for non-invasive prenatal screening? Implications for reproductive autonomy and equal access.

Authors:  Robert-Jan H Galjaard; Inez D de Beaufort; Eline M Bunnik; Adriana Kater-Kuipers
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2019-09-16       Impact factor: 2.903

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.