Literature DB >> 30334131

Decision-making surrounding the use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy reveals misunderstanding regarding its benefit.

Molly M Quinn1, Flor Juarez-Hernandez2, Molly Dunn2, Richard Jason Okamura2, Marcelle I Cedars2, Mitchell P Rosen2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We aimed to explore how patients make decisions regarding use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) for in vitro fertilization (IVF).
METHODS: This is a cross-sectional survey at an academic medical center. Three hundred subjects initiating an IVF cycle over 8 weeks were asked to complete a validated survey to determine how they decided whether or not to pursue PGT-A. All patients were previously counseled that the primary goal of PGT-A is to maximize pregnancy rates per embryo transfer. Survey responses were compared between those who elected PGT-A and those who did not with a chi-squared or t test.
RESULTS: Of 191 subjects who completed the survey, 117 (61%) planned PGT-A, while 74 (39%) did not. Among those who decided to undergo PGT-A, 56% stated their primary reason was to have a healthy baby, while 18% chose PGT-A to reduce the incidence of birth defects, and 16% aimed to decrease the risk of miscarriage. Patients who decided not to pursue PGT-A stated they prioritized avoiding the scenario in which they might have no embryos to transfer (36%) or reducing cost (31%). Both groups rated physicians as the single most important source of information in their decision-making (56% vs 68%, p = NS).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who chose to undergo PGT-A have different priorities from those who do not. Many patients planning PGT-A do so for reasons that are not evidence-based. While patients cite physicians as their primary source of information in the decision-making process, rationales for selecting PGT-A are inconsistent with physician counseling.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aneuploidy screening; In vitro fertilization (IVF); Medical decision-making; Patient counseling; Patient perspectives; Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT)

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30334131      PMCID: PMC6289916          DOI: 10.1007/s10815-018-1337-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet        ISSN: 1058-0468            Impact factor:   3.412


  25 in total

1.  Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare.

Authors:  A M Stiggelbout; T Van der Weijden; M P T De Wit; D Frosch; F Légaré; V M Montori; L Trevena; G Elwyn
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-01-27

2.  Informed consent for total hip arthroplasty: does a written information sheet improve recall by patients?

Authors:  I J Langdon; R Hardin; I D Learmonth
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  Do they listen? A review of information retained by patients following consent for reduction mammoplasty.

Authors:  Y Godwin
Journal:  Br J Plast Surg       Date:  2000-03

Review 4.  A review of, and commentary on, the ongoing second clinical introduction of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) to routine IVF practice.

Authors:  Norbert Gleicher; David H Barad
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2012-10-05       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  In vitro fertilization with single euploid blastocyst transfer: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Eric J Forman; Kathleen H Hong; Kathleen M Ferry; Xin Tao; Deanne Taylor; Brynn Levy; Nathan R Treff; Richard T Scott
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-03-30       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 6.  To err (meiotically) is human: the genesis of human aneuploidy.

Authors:  T Hassold; P Hunt
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 53.242

7.  Evaluation of a method to improve the consent process: improved data retention with stagnant comprehension.

Authors:  Pranitha Naini; James Lewis; Kothanur Rajanna; Alva Bowen Weir
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 2.037

8.  Informed consent: patients listen and read, but what information do they retain?

Authors:  Perry Turner; Chris Williams
Journal:  N Z Med J       Date:  2002-10-25

9.  Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Richard T Scott; Kathleen M Upham; Eric J Forman; Kathleen H Hong; Katherine L Scott; Deanne Taylor; Xin Tao; Nathan R Treff
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-06-01       Impact factor: 7.329

10.  Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study.

Authors:  Zhihong Yang; Jiaen Liu; Gary S Collins; Shala A Salem; Xiaohong Liu; Sarah S Lyle; Alison C Peck; E Scott Sills; Rifaat D Salem
Journal:  Mol Cytogenet       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 2.009

View more
  2 in total

1.  Preimplantation genetic testing and chances of a healthy live birth amongst recipients of fresh donor oocytes in the United States.

Authors:  Cassandra Roeca; Rachel Johnson; Nichole Carlson; Alex J Polotsky
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-07-02       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Pre-implantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: motivations, concerns, and perceptions in a UK population.

Authors:  Benjamin P Jones; Timothy Bracewell-Milnes; Lorraine Kasaven; Ariadne L'Heveder; Megan Spearman; Diana Marcus; Maria Jalmbrant; Joy Green; Rabi Odia; Srdjan Saso; Paul Serhal; Jara Ben Nagi
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 3.412

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.