OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of an educational video explaining aneuploidy testing. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial of women with singleton pregnancies having aneuploidy testing at less than 14 weeks of gestation from September 2016 to March 2017 at our prenatal ultrasound center. We developed an educational video on aneuploidy testing. Participants, stratified by age younger than or 35 years or older at estimated delivery date, were randomized to either view or not view the video before their ultrasonogram. Participants 35 years or older also met with a genetic counselor at the ultrasound appointment. All participants completed a survey assessing knowledge of genetic testing (score of 0-15) at baseline and after the appointment. The primary outcome was change in knowledge score after the intervention. A sample size of 23 per group (n=92) was planned for a total of 46 women younger than 35 years of age and 46 women aged 35 years or older. Data are presented as median (interquartile range). RESULTS: Of 104 eligible women who were approached, 92 were randomized. Forty women aged younger than 35 years and 41 women aged 35 years or older completed the study. Baseline characteristics were similar across groups. In women younger than 35 years, the video group had a significant improvement in knowledge score (+2.0 [1.0-5.0]) compared with the control group (0 [-1.0 to 1.0]; P=.01) and reported better understanding of the information compared with the control group (P<.001) with no change in patient satisfaction (P=.25). In women 35 years or older, change in knowledge score was similar for the video and control groups (P=.98) with no difference in self-reported understanding (P=.49) or patient satisfaction (P=.30). CONCLUSION: A patient-centered educational video explaining aneuploidy testing options improved knowledge and self-reported understanding of the information in women younger than 35 years with no change in patient satisfaction. No difference was seen for women 35 years or older, likely as a result of genetic counseling provided to these women.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of an educational video explaining aneuploidy testing. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled trial of women with singleton pregnancies having aneuploidy testing at less than 14 weeks of gestation from September 2016 to March 2017 at our prenatal ultrasound center. We developed an educational video on aneuploidy testing. Participants, stratified by age younger than or 35 years or older at estimated delivery date, were randomized to either view or not view the video before their ultrasonogram. Participants 35 years or older also met with a genetic counselor at the ultrasound appointment. All participants completed a survey assessing knowledge of genetic testing (score of 0-15) at baseline and after the appointment. The primary outcome was change in knowledge score after the intervention. A sample size of 23 per group (n=92) was planned for a total of 46 women younger than 35 years of age and 46 women aged 35 years or older. Data are presented as median (interquartile range). RESULTS: Of 104 eligible women who were approached, 92 were randomized. Forty women aged younger than 35 years and 41 women aged 35 years or older completed the study. Baseline characteristics were similar across groups. In women younger than 35 years, the video group had a significant improvement in knowledge score (+2.0 [1.0-5.0]) compared with the control group (0 [-1.0 to 1.0]; P=.01) and reported better understanding of the information compared with the control group (P<.001) with no change in patient satisfaction (P=.25). In women 35 years or older, change in knowledge score was similar for the video and control groups (P=.98) with no difference in self-reported understanding (P=.49) or patient satisfaction (P=.30). CONCLUSION: A patient-centered educational video explaining aneuploidy testing options improved knowledge and self-reported understanding of the information in women younger than 35 years with no change in patient satisfaction. No difference was seen for women 35 years or older, likely as a result of genetic counseling provided to these women.
Authors: Allison S Bryant; Mary E Norton; Sanae Nakagawa; Judith T Bishop; Sherri Pena; Steven E Gregorich; Miriam Kuppermann Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Melissa A Geller; Levi S Downs; Patricia L Judson; Rahel Ghebre; Peter A Argenta; Linda F Carson; Amy L Jonson; Kristen Godfrey; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Sue V Petzel Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2010-07-31 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Sonia Ranganath Adams; Michele R Hacker; Anna Merport Modest; Peter L Rosenblatt; Eman A Elkadry Journal: Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg Date: 2012 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 2.091
Authors: Michael E Wilson; Artur Krupa; Richard F Hinds; John M Litell; Keith M Swetz; Abbasali Akhoundi; Rahul Kashyap; Ognjen Gajic; Kianoush Kashani Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Ruth M Farrell; Patricia K Agatisa; Mary Beth Mercer; Ariane G Mitchum; Marissa B Coleridge Journal: Prenat Diagn Date: 2016-04-07 Impact factor: 3.050
Authors: Miriam Kuppermann; Mary E Norton; Elena Gates; Steven E Gregorich; Lee A Learman; Sanae Nakagawa; Vickie A Feldstein; James Lewis; A Eugene Washington; Robert F Nease Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Miriam Kuppermann; Sherri Pena; Judith T Bishop; Sanae Nakagawa; Steven E Gregorich; Anita Sit; Juan Vargas; Aaron B Caughey; Susan Sykes; Lasha Pierce; Mary E Norton Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 56.272