Literature DB >> 29791717

Termination of pregnancy following a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome: A qualitative study of the decision-making process of pregnant couples.

Stina Lou1,2, Kathrine Carstensen1, Olav Bjørn Petersen2,3, Camilla Palmhøj Nielsen1,4, Lone Hvidman5, Maja Retpen Lanther1, Ida Vogel2,6.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: In Denmark, first trimester screening has a very high uptake (>90%). If Down syndrome is diagnosed, termination rates are high (>95%). The aim of this study was to investigate the timing of the decision to terminate pregnancy following a diagnosis of Down syndrome and the factors influencing this decision.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Semi-structured, qualitative interview study with 21 couples who had received a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome and decided to terminate the pregnancy. Participants were recruited from obstetric departments between February 2016 and July 2017. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Five themes were identified: "initial decision-making", "consolidating the decision", "reasons and concerns shaping the termination of pregnancy decision", "the right decision is also burdensome", and "perceived influences in decision-making". For most couples, the initial decision to terminate pregnancy was made before or during the diagnostic process, but it was re-addressed and consolidated following the actual diagnosis. Imagining a family future with a severely affected Down syndrome child was the main factor influencing the termination of pregnancy decision. The decision was articulated as "right" but also as existentially burdensome for some, due to fear of regret and concern about ending a potential life. The decision to terminate pregnancy was considered a private matter between the couple, but was refined through interactions with clinicians and social networks.
CONCLUSION: All couples made an initial decision prior to receiving the Down syndrome diagnosis. Knowledge of the couple's initial decision may facilitate patient-centered communication during and after the diagnostic process. Couples may benefit from counseling to deal with grief and existential concerns.
© 2018 Nordic Federation of Societies of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Down syndrome; decision-making; first trimester screening; parents; prenatal diagnosis; termination of pregnancy

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29791717     DOI: 10.1111/aogs.13386

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand        ISSN: 0001-6349            Impact factor:   3.636


  8 in total

1.  Family Sense-Making After a Down Syndrome Diagnosis.

Authors:  Lauren Clark; Heather E Canary; Kyle McDougle; Rebekah Perkins; Ruth Tadesse; Avery E Holton
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2020-07-03

2.  Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and pregnant women's views on good motherhood: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Elisa Garcia; Lidewij Henneman; Janneke T Gitsels-van der Wal; Linda Martin; Isabel Koopmanschap; Mireille N Bekker; Danielle R M Timmermans
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2021-08-17       Impact factor: 5.351

Review 3.  The Potential Role of miRNAs as Predictive Biomarkers in Neurodevelopmental Disorders.

Authors:  Iman Imtiyaz Ahmed Juvale; Ahmad Tarmizi Che Has
Journal:  J Mol Neurosci       Date:  2021-03-27       Impact factor: 3.444

4.  Genetic and Clinical Features of Heterotaxy in a Prenatal Cohort.

Authors:  Tong Yi; Hairui Sun; Yuwei Fu; Xiaoyan Hao; Lin Sun; Ye Zhang; Jiancheng Han; Xiaoyan Gu; Xiaowei Liu; Yong Guo; Xin Wang; Xiaoxue Zhou; Siyao Zhang; Qi Yang; Jiaqi Fan; Yihua He
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 4.772

5.  Pregnant women's attitudes and decision-making regarding prenatal Down syndrome screening and diagnosis: scale development and validation.

Authors:  Wei-Hsiang Huang; Shu-Fang Shih; Chen-Li Lin; Chieh-Hsing Liu
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-07-14       Impact factor: 3.007

6.  Receiving a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome by phone: a qualitative study of the experiences of pregnant couples.

Authors:  Stina Lou; Kathrine Carstensen; Ida Vogel; Lone Hvidman; Camilla Palmhøj Nielsen; Maja Lanther; Olav Bjørn Petersen
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 2.692

7.  The good, the bad, and the utilitarian: attitudes towards genetic testing and implications for disability.

Authors:  Alexandra Maftei; Oana Dănilă
Journal:  Curr Psychol       Date:  2022-01-17

8.  Viewing the image? Ultrasound examination during abortion preparations, ethical challenges.

Authors:  Marianne Kjelsvik; Ragnhild Jt Sekse; Elin M Aasen; Eva Gjengedal
Journal:  Nurs Ethics       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 2.874

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.