Literature DB >> 3593909

The amniocentesis decision: ten years of decision analytic experience.

S P Pauker, S G Pauker.   

Abstract

Over the past decade we have used a decision analytic model to counsel 840 patients (468 women, 381 men, 432 couples) about amniocentesis for prenatal diagnosis. The model explicitly considers the possibilities of miscarriage (both after amniocentesis and spontaneously), an affected child (as a function of maternal age), and various diagnostic errors. Prospective parents are shown the model after routine counseling is used to explain the options and potential outcomes. Using the lottery technique (in which they are asked to choose between therapeutic abortion and carrying a pregnancy to term without the benefit of amniocentesis, where the likelihood of an affected child is varied in a structured sequence), prospective parents expressed their attitudes on a utility scale, where zero corresponds to an unaffected child and where 100 corresponds to an affected child. On that scale, the mean assessed disutility of therapeutic abortion was 33.7 +/- 32.6 (35.8 +/- 32.1 among women, 30.9 +/- 32.9 among men). The decision model encourages couples to confront their attitudes toward specific reproductive outcomes, to clarify their values and to incorporate them, along with their current risks, into a logical decision about prenatal diagnosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3593909

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Birth Defects Orig Artic Ser        ISSN: 0547-6844


  9 in total

1.  Male partners' role in Latinas' amniocentesis decisions.

Authors:  Carole H Browner; H Mabel Preloran
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 2.537

2.  Routine prenatal screening for congenital heart disease: what can be expected? A decision-analytic approach.

Authors:  E Buskens; E W Steyerberg; J Hess; J W Wladimiroff; D E Grobbee
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Screening for Down's syndrome.

Authors:  R M Keatinge; E S Williams
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-10-26

4.  Follow-up survey of pregnancies with diagnoses of chromosomal abnormality.

Authors:  S Palmer; J Spencer; T Kushnick; J Wiley; S Bowyer
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  1993-09       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Development and Evaluation of a Decision Aid About Prenatal Testing for Women of Advanced Maternal Age.

Authors:  E R Drake; L Engler-Todd; A M O'Connor; L C Surh; A Hunter
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Decision analysis for medical managers.

Authors:  J G Thornton; R J Lilford
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-03-25

7.  Using health-related quality-of-life information: clinical encounters, clinical trials, and health policy.

Authors:  J Tsevat; J C Weeks; E Guadagnoli; A N Tosteson; C M Mangione; J S Pliskin; M C Weinstein; P D Cleary
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Appraisal of a new scheme for prenatal screening for Down's syndrome.

Authors:  T A Sheldon; J Simpson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-05-11

9.  The effects of an 'explicit' values clarification exercise in a woman's decision aid regarding postmenopausal hormone therapy.

Authors:  Annette M. O'Connor; George A. Wells; Peter Tugwell; Andreas Laupacis; Tom Elmslie; Elizabeth Drake
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 3.377

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.