Literature DB >> 23394407

Preparation for prenatal decision-making: a baseline of knowledge and reflection in women participating in prenatal screening.

Judith L M McCoyd1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This prospective study gathered baseline information about knowledge and intentions regarding prenatal testing from women attending their nuchal translucency (NT) ultrasound and first sequential blood screen.
METHOD: Surveys including questions about pregnancy history and hypotheticals about fetal diagnoses were distributed to all willing participants at an urban hospital and a suburban medical building during the waiting time for the NT (N = 659).
RESULTS: The majority "never thought anything could be wrong" with their fetus and had not talked with the father or the health providers about that possibility. Presented with varied fetal diagnoses, the larger group nearly always "had the baby", except in the case of a fatal condition where 28% said they would have the baby in contrast to 26% who would end the pregnancy (remainder undecided). Hypotheticals about varied fetal conditions were generally "undecided" by a quarter to nearly half of the respondents.
CONCLUSION: Women's baseline knowledge and reflection about the nature of prenatal screening and diagnosis are minimal in contrast to the large impact positive results could have on their lives. Providers need to weigh the benefit of priming decision-making by exposing women to the possibility of fetal diagnosis, against the cost of raised anxiety.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23394407     DOI: 10.3109/0167482X.2012.757590

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol        ISSN: 0167-482X            Impact factor:   2.949


  8 in total

Review 1.  Balancing Genetics (Science) and Counseling (Art) in Prenatal Chromosomal Microarray Testing.

Authors:  Allison Werner-Lin; Judith L M McCoyd; Barbara A Bernhardt
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-05-21       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  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

3.  Is preparation a good reason for prenatal genetic testing? Ethical and critical questions.

Authors:  Marsha Michie
Journal:  Birth Defects Res       Date:  2020-03-01       Impact factor: 2.344

4.  Knowledge of Prenatal Screening, Down Syndrome, Amniocentesis, and Related Factors among Iranian Pregnant Women: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Maryam Rabiee; Zahra Jouhari; Ashraf Pirasteh
Journal:  Int J Community Based Nurs Midwifery       Date:  2019-04

Review 5.  Decision-making factors in prenatal testing: A systematic review.

Authors:  Valentina Di Mattei; Federica Ferrari; Gaia Perego; Valentina Tobia; Fabio Mauro; Massimo Candiani
Journal:  Health Psychol Open       Date:  2021-01-13

Review 6.  The Psychological Challenges of Replacing Conventional Karyotyping with Genomic SNP Array Analysis in Prenatal Testing.

Authors:  Sam Riedijk; Karin E M Diderich; Sanne L van der Steen; Lutgarde C P Govaerts; Marieke Joosten; Maarten F C M Knapen; Femke A T de Vries; Diane van Opstal; Aad Tibben; Robert-Jan H Galjaard
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2014-07-03       Impact factor: 4.241

7.  Choosing between Higher and Lower Resolution Microarrays: do Pregnant Women Have Sufficient Knowledge to Make Informed Choices Consistent with their Attitude?

Authors:  S L van der Steen; E M Bunnik; M G Polak; K E M Diderich; J Verhagen-Visser; L C P Govaerts; M Joosten; M F C M Knapen; A T J I Go; D Van Opstal; M I Srebniak; R J H Galjaard; A Tibben; S R Riedijk
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-07-04       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Why do patients decline amniocentesis? Analysis of factors influencing the decision to refuse invasive prenatal testing.

Authors:  Pawel Sadlecki; Marek Grabiec; Pawel Walentowicz; Malgorzata Walentowicz-Sadlecka
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2018-05-16       Impact factor: 3.007

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.