Literature DB >> 24045783

Physician recommendation for invasive prenatal testing: the case of the 'precious baby'.

Naama Srebnik1, Talya Miron-Shatz, Jonathan J Rolison, Yaniv Hanoch, Avi Tsafrir.   

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: Do clinicians manage pregnancies conceived by assisted reproductive technologies (ART) differently from spontaneous pregnancies? SUMMARY ANSWER: Clinicians' decisions about prenatal testing during pregnancy depend, at least partially, on the method of conception. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Research thus far has shown that patients' decisions regarding prenatal screening are different in ART pregnancies compared with spontaneous ones, such that ART pregnancies may be considered more valuable or 'precious' than pregnancies conceived without treatment. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE AND DURATION: In this cross-sectional study, preformed during the year 2011, 163 obstetricians and gynecologists in Israel completed an anonymous online questionnaire. PARTICIPANTS, SETTING,
METHODS: Clinicians were randomly assigned to read one of two versions of a vignette describing the case of a pregnant woman. The two versions differed only with regard to the method of conception (ART; n = 78 versus spontaneous; n = 85). Clinicians were asked to provide their recommendations regarding amniocentesis. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The response rate among all clinicians invited to complete the questionnaire was 16.7%. Of the 85 clinicians presented with the spontaneous pregnancy scenario, 37 (43.5%) recommended amniocentesis. In contrast, of the 78 clinicians presented with the ART pregnancy scenario, only 15 (19.2%) recommended the test. Clinicians were 3.2 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-6.6) times more likely to recommend amniocentesis for a spontaneous pregnancy than for an ART pregnancy. LIMITATIONS AND REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study is limited by a low response rate, the relatively small sample and the hypothetical nature of the decision, as clinician recommendations may have differed in an actual clinical setting. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
FINDINGS: Our findings show that fertility history and use of ART may affect clinicians' recommendations regarding amniocentesis following receipt of screening test results. This raises the question of how subjective factors influence clinicians' decisions regarding other aspects of pregnancy management. STUDY FUNDING AND COMPETING INTEREST: There was no funding source to this study. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ART; decision making; infertility; prenatal diagnosis; prenatal screening

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24045783     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/det354

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  9 in total

1.  Perinatal outcomes associated with assisted reproductive technology: the Massachusetts Outcomes Study of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (MOSART).

Authors:  Eugene Declercq; Barbara Luke; Candice Belanoff; Howard Cabral; Hafsatou Diop; Daksha Gopal; Lan Hoang; Milton Kotelchuck; Judy E Stern; Mark D Hornstein
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 7.329

2.  Invasive Prenatal Diagnostic Testing Recommendations are Influenced by Maternal Age, Statistical Misconception and Perceived Liability.

Authors:  Talya Miron-Shatz; Sivan R Rapaport; Naama Srebnik; Yaniv Hanoch; Jonina Rabinowitz; Glen M Doniger; Linda Levi; Jonathan J Rolison; Avi Tsafrir
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes associated with underlying diagnosis with and without assisted reproductive technology treatment.

Authors:  Judy E Stern; Barbara Luke; Michael Tobias; Daksha Gopal; Mark D Hornstein; Hafsatou Diop
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2015-03-23       Impact factor: 7.329

4.  Factors associated with increased odds of cesarean delivery in ART pregnancies.

Authors:  Judy E Stern; Chia-Ling Liu; Howard J Cabral; Elliott G Richards; Charles C Coddington; Stacey A Missmer; Hafsatou Diop
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 7.329

5.  Adverse pregnancy, birth, and infant outcomes in twins: effects of maternal fertility status and infant gender combinations; the Massachusetts Outcomes Study of Assisted Reproductive Technology.

Authors:  Barbara Luke; Daksha Gopal; Howard Cabral; Judy E Stern; Hafsatou Diop
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 8.661

6.  Factors that affect the decision to undergo amniocentesis in women with normal Down syndrome screening results: it is all about the age.

Authors:  Julia Grinshpun-Cohen; Talya Miron-Shatz; Liat Ries-Levavi; Elon Pras
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-05-12       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  How can we improve amniocentesis decision-making?

Authors:  Lisa Soleymani Lehmann
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2016-02-05

8.  The limited effect of information on Israeli pregnant women at advanced maternal age who decide to undergo amniocentesis.

Authors:  Julia Grinshpun-Cohen; Talya Miron-Shatz; Michal Berkenstet; Elon Pras
Journal:  Isr J Health Policy Res       Date:  2015-08-17

9.  How Do Psychiatrists Apply the Minimum Clinically Important Difference to Assess Patient Responses to Treatment?

Authors:  Alan J McMichael; Jonathan J Rolison; Marco Boeri; Joseph P M Kane; Francis A O'Neill; Frank Kee
Journal:  MDM Policy Pract       Date:  2016-11-11
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.