What do people want to know about NIPT? Content analysis of questions emailed to national NIPT information websites

Non-invasive prenatal testing: Assessing the availability and accessibility of information available to the pregnant population within the Republic of Ireland

OBJECTIVE

While non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been widely adopted throughout Europe, Australia, and the USA, population level access to NIPT varies considerably. Ireland has no national screening programme for fetal anomalies, although NIPT is available from out-of-country providers. We aimed to describe the availability of NIPT in Ireland and the quality of information available online from NIPT providers.

METHODS

Information available online from NIPT providers in the Republic of Ireland was analysed by examining all healthcare facilities websites and reviewing private health insurance directories. Data on information provided by NIPT providers was collected by two independent researchers from April to May 2023.

RESULTS

Four of the 19 maternity hospitals/units in Ireland had information on NIPT on their websites, with three including an explanation of NIPT, testing accuracy, and associated fees (€380-480). Twenty private clinics led by obstetric consultants advertised NIPT online, of which seventeen clinics included an explanation of NIPT, testing accuracy, and associated fees (€380-€650). Twenty-nine other providers, which included ultrasound clinics, direct-to-consumer laboratory testing, and General Practitioners, advertised NIPT with 18 of these providers including an explanation of NIPT, testing accuracy, and associated fees (€179-€630).

CONCLUSION

While there is apparent demand for NIPT and it is available in Ireland, there is disparity between providers on the type and quality of information available. Difficulty obtaining accessible information, the associated financial costs and location of providers advertising NIPT are likely to be barriers to accessing NIPT. A national screening programme for aneuploidy should be considered to ensure both equitable access to and reliable information about prenatal screening.

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): is routinization problematic?

BACKGROUND

The introduction and wide application of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has triggered further evolution of routines in the practice of prenatal diagnosis. 'Routinization' of prenatal diagnosis however has been associated with hampered informed choice and eugenic attitudes or outcomes. It is viewed, at least in some countries, with great suspicion in both bioethics and public discourse. However, it is a heterogeneous phenomenon that needs to be scrutinized in the wider context of social practices of reproductive genetics. In different countries with their different regulatory frameworks, different patterns of routines emerge that have different ethical implications. This paper discusses an ethics of routines informed by the perspectives of organizational sociology and psychology, where a routine is defined as a repetitive, recognizable pattern of interdependent organizational actions that is carried out by multiple performers. We favour a process approach that debunks the view - which gives way to most of the concerns - that routines are always blindly performed. If this is so, routines are therefore not necessarily incompatible with responsible decision-making. Free and informed decision-making can, as we argue, be a key criterion for the ethical evaluation of testing routines. If free and informed decision-making by each pregnant woman is the objective, routines in prenatal testing may not be ethically problematic, but rather are defensible and helpful. We compare recent experiences of NIPT routines in the context of prenatal screening programmes in Germany, Israel and the Netherlands. Notable variation can be observed between these three countries (i) in the levels of routinization around NIPT, (ii) in the scope of routinization, and (iii) in public attitudes toward routinized prenatal testing.

CONCLUSION

An ethics of routines in the field of prenatal diagnostics should incorporate and work with the necessary distinctions between levels and forms of routines, in order to develop sound criteria for their evaluation.

Nationwide implementation of the non-invasive prenatal test: Evaluation of a blended learning program for counselors

This study assesses the results of a mandatory blended learning-program for counselors (e.g. midwives, sonographers, obstetricians) guiding national implementation of the Non-Invasive Prenatal Test (NIPT). We assessed counselors’ 1) knowledge about prenatal aneuploidy screening, 2) factors associated with their knowledge (e.g. counselors’ characteristics, attitudes towards NIPT), and 3) counselors’ attitudes regarding the blended learning. A cross-sectional online pretest-posttest implementation survey was sent to all 2,813 Dutch prenatal counselors. Multivariate linear regression analyses were performed to identify associations between counselors’ knowledge and e.g. their professional backgrounds, work experience and attitudes towards NIPT. At T0 and T1 1,635 and 913 counselors completed the survey, respectively. Overall results show an increased mean number of correct answered knowledge questions; 23/35 (66%) items at T0 and 28/37 (76%) items at T1. Knowledge gaps on highly specific topics remained. Work experience and secondary care work-setting were positively associated with a higher level of knowledge. Most counselors (74%) showed positive attitudes towards the blended learning program. The mandatory blended learning, along with learning by experience through implementation of NIPT, has facilitated an increase in counselors’ knowledge and was well received. New implementations in healthcare may benefit from requiring blended learning for healthcare providers, especially if tailored to professionals’ learning goals.

Evaluation of YouTube Videos as a Source of Information on Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing

Aim: Non-invasive prenatal testing is a method that determines the risk of a fetus being born with certain genetic abnormalities. In this study, we aimed to examine the quality of information on YouTube for non-invasive prenatal testing. Methods: The term "Non-invasive prenatal testing" was entered in the YouTube search bar on May 1, 2021, and the top 50 YouTube videos of the non-invasive prenatal testing with the highest number of views were recorded after the exclusion of videos with a non-English language, videos repeated twice and irrelevant videos. Length of the videos, likes, and dislikes were recorded. Videos were evaluated by two obstetricians. A questionnaire consisting of 9 dichotomous questions was conducted to assess whether there was adequate information about non-invasive prenatal testing. In addition, video quality was evaluated with the Global Quality Scale, the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool and the Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Criteria. Results: The mean Global Quality Scale was 2.96±0.62. Most videos answered the question: ‘What is non-invasive prenatal testing?’ (94%), and ‘How is non-invasive prenatal testing done?’ (82%). However, there was a lack of information about the limitation of non-invasive prenatal testing in certain situations (only %16 of videos answered limitations of non-invasive prenatal testing). Three (6%) of the videos had misinformation. The mean Global Quality Scale was 2.96±0.62. The Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool mean value was 72% and 58% in terms of understandability and actionability, respectively. The mean Journal of the American Medical Association Benchmark Criteria score was found as 1.4±0.8. Conclusion: The videos posted about non-invasive prenatal testing on YouTube were of poor-moderate quality. If the quality of the videos increases, patients can have sufficient and accurate information about non-invasive prenatal, especially during these pandemic days. Keywords: health information, prenatal diagnosis, online systems

New screen on the block: non-invasive prenatal testing for fetal chromosomal abnormalities

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is a new screen for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. It is a screening test based on technology that involves the analysis of feto-placental DNA that is present in maternal blood. This DNA is then analysed for abnormalities of specific chromosomes (eg 13, 18, 21, X, Y). NIPT has a much higher screening capability for chromosomal abnormalities than current combined first trimester screening, with ~99% sensitivity for trisomy 21 (Down syndrome) and at least a 10-fold higher positive predictive value. The low false-positive rate (1-3%) is one of the most advertised advantages of NIPT. In practice, this could lead to a significant reduction in the number of false-positive tests and the need for invasive diagnostic procedures. NIPT is now suitable for singleton and twin pregnancies and can be performed from ~10 weeks in a pregnancy. NIPT is not currently publicly funded in most countries. However, the increasing availability of NIPT commercially will likely lead to an increase in demand for this as a screening option. Given the high numbers of women who visit a general practitioner (GP) in their first trimester, GPs are well-placed to also offer NIPT as a screening option. A GP's role in facilitating access to this service will likely be crucial in ensuring equity in access to this technology, and it is important to ensure that they are well supported to do so.

Direct-to-consumer carrier screening for cystic fibrosis via a hospital website: a 6-year evaluation

A Dutch university hospital started offering cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier screening directly to consumers (DTC) through their website in 2010. A 6-year process evaluation was conducted to evaluate the offer. Screening was implemented as intended. However, uptake was lower than expected. Forty-four tests have been requested, partly by couples with a positive family history for CF, which was not the intended target group. Users were generally positive about the screening offer, citing accessibility, ease of testing, anonymity, and perceived shortcomings of regular healthcare as reasons for requesting screening. DTC CF carrier screening via a university hospital website is feasible, but is seldom used. Considering technological advances, continuation of this specific offer is questionable.

Implementing non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy in a national healthcare system: global challenges and national solutions

Background

Since the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in 2011, mainly by commercial companies, a growing demand for NIPT from the public and healthcare professionals has been putting pressure on the healthcare systems of various countries. This study identifies the challenges of establishing a responsible implementation of NIPT for aneuploidy in prenatal healthcare, by looking at the Netherlands.

Methods

A mixed methods approach involving 13 stakeholder interviews, document analysis and (participatory) observations of the Dutch NIPT Consortium meetings were used. The Diffusion of Innovation Theory and a Network of Actors model were used to interpret the findings.

Results

Implementation of NIPT was facilitated by several factors. The set-up of a national NIPT Consortium enabled discussion and collaboration between stakeholders. Moreover, it led to the plan to offer NIPT through a nationwide research setting (TRIDENT studies), which created a learning phase for careful implementation. The Dutch legal context was perceived as a delaying factor, but eventually gave room for the parties involved to organise themselves and their practices.

Conclusions

This study shows that implementing advanced technologies with profound effects on prenatal care benefit from a learning phase that allows time to carefully evaluate the technical performance and women’s experiences and to enable public debate. Such a coordinated learning phase, involving all stakeholders, will stimulate the process of responsible and sustainable implementation.

What do people want to know about NIPT? Content analysis of questions emailed to national NIPT information websites

What's already known about this topic?

Several countries, including the Netherlands, have implemented non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in their national prenatal screening program

Access to relevant online health information is important as it increases informed decision making

What does this study add?

Visitors of national NIPT websites mostly request more information about testing beyond the currently available NIPT: a broader range of disorders (such as monogenic disorders) and increasing target group eligibility (such as low‐risk or twin pregnancies)

© 2017 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.