Literature DB >> 33503072

Psychological outcomes, knowledge and preferences of pregnant women on first-trimester screening for fetal structural abnormalities: A prospective cohort study.

Francesca Bardi1, Merel Bakker1, Monique J A Kenkhuis1, Adelita V Ranchor2, Marian K Bakker1, Ayten Elvan1, Erwin Birnie1,3, Caterina M Bilardo1,4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The primary aim of this study is to investigate the impact of a 13-week anomaly scan on the experienced levels of maternal anxiety and well-being. Secondly, to explore women's knowledge on the possibilities and limitations of the scan and the preferred timing of screening for structural abnormalities.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective-cohort study conducted between 2013-2015, pregnant women in the North-Netherlands underwent a 13-week anomaly scan. Four online-questionnaires (Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4) were completed before and after the 13- and the 20-week anomaly scans. In total, 1512 women consented to participate in the study and 1118 (74%) completed the questionnaires at Q1, 941 (64%) at Q2, 807 (55%) at Q3 and 535 (37%) at Q4. Psychological outcomes were measured by the state-trait inventory-scale (STAI), the patient's positive-negative affect (PANAS) and ad-hoc designed questionnaires.
RESULTS: Nine-nine percent of women wished to be informed as early as possible in pregnancy about the absence/presence of structural abnormalities. In 87% of women levels of knowledge on the goals and limitations of the 13-week anomaly scan were moderate-to-high. In women with a normal 13-week scan result, anxiety levels decreased (P < .001) and well-being increased over time (P < .001). In women with false-positive results (n = 26), anxiety levels initially increased (STAI-Q1: 39.8 vs. STAI-Q2: 48.6, P = 0.025), but later decreased around the 20-week anomaly scan (STAI-Q3: 36.4 vs. STAI-Q4: 34.2, P = 0.36).
CONCLUSIONS: The 13-week scan did not negatively impact the psychological well-being of pregnant women. The small number of women with screen-positive results temporarily experienced higher anxiety after the scan but, in false-positive cases, anxiety levels normalized again when the abnormality was not confirmed at follow-up scans. Finally, most pregnant women have moderate-to-high levels of knowledge and strongly prefer early screening for fetal structural abnormalities.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33503072      PMCID: PMC7840026          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245938

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  31 in total

1.  Revisiting Wilson and Jungner in the genomic age: a review of screening criteria over the past 40 years.

Authors:  Anne Andermann; Ingeborg Blancquaert; Sylvie Beauchamp; Véronique Déry
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 9.408

2.  Nuchal translucency screening and anxiety levels in pregnancy and puerperium.

Authors:  M A Müller; O P Bleker; G J Bonsel; C M Bilardo
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 7.299

3.  Attitudes of pregnant women regarding termination of pregnancy for fetal abnormality.

Authors:  A P Souka; V D Michalitsi; H Skentou; H Euripioti; G K Papadopoulos; D Kassanos; I E Messinis; E E Salamalekis
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.050

4.  Do pregnant women in Greece make informed choices about antenatal screening for Down's syndrome? A questionnaire survey.

Authors:  Kleanthi Gourounti; Jane Sandall
Journal:  Midwifery       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 2.372

5.  A randomized trial of a prenatal genetic testing interactive computerized information aid.

Authors:  Lynn M Yee; Michael Wolf; Rebecca Mullen; Ashley R Bergeron; Stacy Cooper Bailey; Robert Levine; William A Grobman
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2014-03-18       Impact factor: 3.050

6.  The development of a six-item short-form of the state scale of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI).

Authors:  T M Marteau; H Bekker
Journal:  Br J Clin Psychol       Date:  1992-09

Review 7.  Systematic review of first-trimester ultrasound screening for detection of fetal structural anomalies and factors that affect screening performance.

Authors:  J N Karim; N W Roberts; L J Salomon; A T Papageorghiou
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-09-07       Impact factor: 7.299

Review 8.  Decision support tools in low back pain.

Authors:  Veerle M H Coupé; Miranda L van Hooff; Marinus de Kleuver; Ewout W Steyerberg; Raymond W J G Ostelo
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2017-08-05       Impact factor: 4.098

9.  Early Detection of Structural Anomalies in a Primary Care Setting in the Netherlands.

Authors:  Francesca Bardi; Eric Smith; Maja Kuilman; Rosalinde J M Snijders; Caterina Maddalena Bilardo
Journal:  Fetal Diagn Ther       Date:  2018-07-25       Impact factor: 2.587

10.  Maternal psychological responses during pregnancy after ultrasonographic detection of structural fetal anomalies: A prospective longitudinal observational study.

Authors:  Anne Kaasen; Anne Helbig; Ulrik F Malt; Tormod Næs; Hans Skari; Guttorm Haugen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-28       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  4 in total

1.  Parental experiences of rapid exome sequencing in cases with major ultrasound anomalies during pregnancy.

Authors:  Mirjam Plantinga; Lauren Zwienenberg; Eva van Dijk; Hanna Breet; Janouk Diphoorn; Julia El Mecky; Katelijne Bouman; Joke Verheij; Erwin Birnie; Adelita V Ranchor; Nicole Corsten-Janssen; Irene M van Langen
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2021-10-22       Impact factor: 3.242

2.  Parental Hopes and Understandings of the Value of Prenatal Diagnostic Genomic Sequencing: A Qualitative Analysis.

Authors:  Simon M Outram; Julia E H Brown; Astrid N Zamora; Nuriye Sahin-Hodoglugil; Sara L Ackerman
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 4.772

3.  Timing of diagnosis of fetal structural abnormalities after the introduction of universal cell-free DNA in the absence of first-trimester anatomical screening.

Authors:  Francesca Bardi; Anne Marie Beekhuis; Marian K Bakker; Ayten Elvan-Taşpınar; Caterina Maddalena Bilardo
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2022-09-03       Impact factor: 3.242

4.  Maternal Mental Health following Ultrasonographic Detection of Fetal Structural Anomaly in the Midst of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Nur Rowaidah Roslan; Mohd Fadhli Mohd Fauzi; Lim Wan Teng; Abdul Ghani Nur Azurah
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-12-07       Impact factor: 3.390

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.