Literature DB >> 22237434

The impact of false-positive newborn screening results on families: a qualitative study.

Johanna L Schmidt1, Karen Castellanos-Brown, Saltanat Childress, Natasha Bonhomme, Julianne S Oktay, Sharon F Terry, Penny Kyler, Amy Davidoff, Carol Greene.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Newborn screening leads to improved treatment and disease outcomes, but false-positive newborn screening results may cause distress for parents. The purpose of this study was to describe the experiences of families who receive a false-positive newborn screening result in an attempt to discover ways to help improve the newborn screening communication process for families.
METHODS: This was a qualitative study using two methods of data collection: in-depth, semistructured interviews and focus groups. Participants (N = 27) were parents whose children (ages 6-16 months) underwent follow-up testing after newborn screening and whose follow-up test results indicated that the newborn screening result was a false-positive.
RESULTS: Our analysis found that parents who have a false-positive newborn screening result experience five distinct stages. Most parents did not report long-term negative impacts of the experience, but some experienced some residual worry. Participants described effective provider communication as key in mitigating stress. Some parents identified the experience as leading to positive outcomes.
CONCLUSION: Identifying best practices for communication between the health care providers and parents is an essential component in improving the newborn screening process. Further research is needed to discover best practices for communication to minimize potential harm and maximize the benefits of newborn screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22237434     DOI: 10.1038/gim.2011.5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  21 in total

1.  Parental Views on Expanded Newborn Screening Using Whole-Genome Sequencing.

Authors:  Galen Joseph; Flavia Chen; Julie Harris-Wai; Jennifer M Puck; Charlotte Young; Barbara A Koenig
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 7.124

2.  Qualitative Research on Expanded Prenatal and Newborn Screening: Robust but Marginalized.

Authors:  Rachel Grob
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 2.683

3.  The Risk of Fatty Acid Oxidation Disorders and Organic Acidemias in Children with Normal Newborn Screening.

Authors:  Callum Wilson; Detlef Knoll; Mark de Hora; Campbell Kyle; Emma Glamuzina; Dianne Webster
Journal:  JIMD Rep       Date:  2016-12-08

4.  Newborn screening for Pompe disease: impact on families.

Authors:  B Pruniski; E Lisi; N Ali
Journal:  J Inherit Metab Dis       Date:  2018-03-28       Impact factor: 4.982

Review 5.  Newborn screening for lysosomal storage disorders and other neuronopathic conditions.

Authors:  Dietrich Matern; Devin Oglesbee; Silvia Tortorelli
Journal:  Dev Disabil Res Rev       Date:  2013

6.  Psychosocial impact on mothers receiving expanded newborn screening results.

Authors:  Kathleen O'Connor; Tara Jukes; Sharan Goobie; Jennifer DiRaimo; Greg Moran; Beth Katherine Potter; Pranesh Chakraborty; Charles Anthony Rupar; Srinitya Gannavarapu; Chitra Prasad
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-01-29       Impact factor: 4.246

7.  The Newborn Screening Paradox: Sensitivity vs. Overdiagnosis in VLCAD Deficiency.

Authors:  Eugene Diekman; Monique de Sain-van der Velden; Hans Waterham; Leo Kluijtmans; Peter Schielen; Evert Ben van Veen; Sacha Ferdinandusse; Frits Wijburg; Gepke Visser
Journal:  JIMD Rep       Date:  2015-10-10

8.  Prenatal Education of Parents About Newborn Screening and Residual Dried Blood Spots: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Jeffrey R Botkin; Erin Rothwell; Rebecca A Anderson; Nancy C Rose; Siobhan M Dolan; Miriam Kuppermann; Louisa A Stark; Aaron Goldenberg; Bob Wong
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 16.193

9.  Evaluating Harms in the Assessment of Net Benefit: A Framework for Newborn Screening Condition Review.

Authors:  Aaron J Goldenberg; Anne Marie Comeau; Scott D Grosse; Susan Tanksley; Lisa A Prosser; Jelili Ojodu; Jeffrey R Botkin; Alex R Kemper; Nancy S Green
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2016-03

10.  The Value of Cognitive Pretesting: Improving Validity and Revealing Blind Spots through the Development of a Newborn Screening Parent Experiences Survey.

Authors:  Norma-Jean Simon; Anne Atkins; Brianne Miller; Natasha Bonhomme; Beth Tarini
Journal:  Int J Neonatal Screen       Date:  2021-07-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.