Literature DB >> 23886854

Non-invasive prenatal testing for Down's syndrome: pregnant women's views and likely uptake.

C Lewis1, C Silcock, L S Chitty.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for Down's syndrome into routine state-funded antenatal care in the UK is approaching.
METHODS: We conducted qualitative one-to-one interviews with 40 pregnant women to ascertain their views on using NIPT for Down's syndrome.
RESULTS: The overwhelming majority of women viewed NIPT as a positive advancement in prenatal care, highlighting numerous practical and psychological advantages of a safe test that was highly accurate and could be conducted early in pregnancy. Concerns raised were that testing could become routinised, and that pressure to test might occur with women feeling less justified in declining a blood test that is available and offered by trusted health professionals; the impact on the disabled community and stigma for women who decline testing was also noted. Nevertheless, the vast majority of women said they would be likely to use NIPT, including half of the women who currently decline screening. Women's preference was for pre- and post-test counselling to be delivered by a midwife.
CONCLUSION: The successful introduction of NIPT into routine prenatal care will require guidelines and counselling strategies which ensure women are offered this test in a way which safeguards informed consent.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23886854     DOI: 10.1159/000353523

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Genomics        ISSN: 1662-4246            Impact factor:   2.000


  42 in total

1.  Benefits, challenges and ethical principles associated with implementing noninvasive prenatal testing: a Delphi study.

Authors:  Charles Dupras; Stanislav Birko; Aliya Affdal; Hazar Haidar; Marie-Eve Lemoine; Vardit Ravitsky
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2018-10-31

2.  Perspectives of Pregnant People and Clinicians on Noninvasive Prenatal Testing: A Systematic Review and Qualitative Meta-synthesis.

Authors:  Meredith Vanstone; Alexandra Cernat; Umair Majid; Forum Trivedi; Chanté De Freitas
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2019-02-19

3.  [France and Great-Britain at the age of genomic medicine: new ethical challenges in reproductive medicine].

Authors:  Ruth Horn
Journal:  Med Sci (Paris)       Date:  2019-02-18       Impact factor: 0.818

4.  Demographic and experiential correlates of public attitudes towards cell-free fetal DNA screening.

Authors:  Lauren C Sayres; Megan Allyse; Taylor A Goodspeed; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Global perspectives on clinical adoption of NIPT.

Authors:  Mollie A Minear; Celine Lewis; Subarna Pradhan; Subhashini Chandrasekharan
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 3.050

6.  Talking Points: Women's Information Needs for Informed Decision-Making About Noninvasive Prenatal Testing for Down Syndrome.

Authors:  Aimée C Dane; Madelyn Peterson; Yvette D Miller
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-03-17       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Spanish- and English-Speaking Pregnant Women's Views on cfDNA and Other Prenatal Screening: Practical and Ethical Reflections.

Authors:  Erin Floyd; Megan A Allyse; Marsha Michie
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 2.537

8.  Acceptability of prenatal testing and termination of pregnancy in Pakistan.

Authors:  H Jafri; J Hewison; E Sheridan; S Ahmed
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2014-08-01

9.  NIPT and Informed Consent: an Assessment of Patient Understanding of a Negative NIPT Result.

Authors:  Julie L Piechan; Karrie A Hines; Daniel L Koller; Kristyne Stone; Kimberly Quaid; Wilfredo Torres-Martinez; Divya Wilson Mathews; Tatiana Foroud; Lola Cook
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.