Literature DB >> 24100043

Midwives' views on appropriate antenatal counselling for congenital anomaly tests: do they match clients' preferences?

Linda Martin1, Eileen K Hutton2, Evelien R Spelten3, Janneke T Gitsels-van der Wal4, Sandra van Dulmen5.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: this study aims to provide insight into: (a) midwives' views on appropriate antenatal counselling for congenital anomaly tests, and (b) whether these views match clients' preferences regarding antenatal counselling.
DESIGN: a comparative (midwives versus clients) questionnaire survey. Cognitive interviews (n=8) were used to validate the internal validity of the midwifery questionnaire results. PARTICIPANTS AND
SETTING: 1416 Dutch midwives (response 62%) completed a questionnaire measuring their views on appropriate antenatal counselling for congenital anomaly tests. MEASUREMENTS: we used the 58-item midwives' version of the QUOTE (prenatal), an instrument to assess clients' counselling preferences. Descriptive statistics were used to explore midwives' views on appropriate counselling and how these relate to client preferences as measured previously with the clients' version of the QUOTE (prenatal).
FINDINGS: almost all midwives consider the client-midwife relation (100%) and health education (95%) to be (very) important for appropriate antenatal counselling for congenital anomaly tests. Almost half of the midwives consider decision-making support (47%) to be (very) important. These findings are practically congruent with client preferences. Still, clinically relevant differences were found regarding 13 individual items, e.g. more clients than midwives value 'medical information about congenital anomalies' and 'getting advice whether to take prenatal tests or not'. KEY
CONCLUSION: like clients, most midwives value a good client-midwife relation and health education as (very) important for antenatal counselling for congenital anomaly tests. Less than half of them value decision-making support. These findings are in contrast with the literature in which decision-making support is seen as the most important part of antenatal counselling for congenital anomaly tests. IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE: preferably, antenatal counselling for congenital anomaly tests should be consistent with the three-function model of antenatal counselling i.e. maintaining a client-midwife relation, providing health education as well as decision-making support, and tailored to clients' individual preferences. As not all midwives subscribe to these functions, reflection on their views is important. Furthermore, midwives need to bridge their views on appropriate antenatal counselling and client preferences. To do so, midwives may benefit from the Shared Decision Making approach.
© 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Antenatal counselling; Congenital anomalies; Midwives; Professional opinions

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24100043     DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2013.08.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Midwifery        ISSN: 0266-6138            Impact factor:   2.372


  5 in total

1.  Comparing genetic counselor's and patient's perceptions of needs in prenatal chromosomal microarray testing.

Authors:  Sarah A Walser; Katherine S Kellom; Steven C Palmer; Barbara A Bernhardt
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 3.050

2.  Counselling for prenatal anomaly screening to migrant women in the Netherlands: An interview study of primary care midwives' perceived barriers with client-midwife communication.

Authors:  Isabel Koopmanschap; Linda Martin; Janneke T Gitsels-van der Wal; Jeanine Suurmond
Journal:  Eur J Midwifery       Date:  2022-05-19

Review 3.  Factors Affecting Improved Prenatal Screening: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Zohreh Shahhosseini; Hoda Arabi; Azam Salehi; Zeinab Hamzehgardeshi
Journal:  Glob J Health Sci       Date:  2015-09-28

4.  Older mothers and increased impact of prenatal screening: stable livebirth prevalence of trisomy 21 in the Netherlands for the period 2000-2013.

Authors:  Maurike D de Groot-van der Mooren; Saskia Tamminga; Dick Oepkes; Michel E Weijerman; Martina C Cornel
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 4.246

5.  Implementing non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in the Netherlands: An interview study exploring opinions about and experiences with societal pressure, reimbursement, and an expanding scope.

Authors:  Iris M Bakkeren; Adriana Kater-Kuipers; Eline M Bunnik; Attie T J I Go; Aad Tibben; Inez D de Beaufort; Robert-Jan H Galjaard; Sam R Riedijk
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2019-11-11       Impact factor: 2.537

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.