Evaluating for disparities in prenatal genetic counseling

Social vulnerability and prenatal diagnosis

OBJECTIVES

There are limited data on how neighborhood-level risk factors affect the likelihood of having prenatal diagnosis. Neighborhood social vulnerability can be quantified and ranked using the social vulnerability index (SVI), a tool that measures the cumulative effect of external stressors in the local environment that may affect health outcomes. The objective of the study was to determine the relationship between SVI and prenatal diagnosis among pregnant patients who received genetic counseling.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of all pregnant patients who had genetic counseling at two hospitals in New York between January 2019 and December 2022. For each patient, the address of residence was linked to an SVI score (primary exposure) based on census tract. SVI scores were subdivided into fifths and analyzed categorically. The primary outcome was prenatal diagnosis (yes/no). Multivariable logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 5,935 patients were included for analysis and 231 (3.9 %) had prenatal diagnosis. On regression analysis, no association between SVI and prenatal diagnosis was observed. Patients who had a diagnostic procedure were more likely to be English speaking (aOR 1.80; 95 % CI 1.13-2.87), carriers of a genetic disorder (aOR 1.94; 95 % CI 1.32-2.86), had increased NT (aOR 6.89; 95 % CI 3.65-13.00), abnormal NIPS (aOR 9.58; 95 % CI 5.81-15.80), or had fetal structural anomalies (aOR 10.60; 95 % CI 6.62-16.96). No differences were seen based on race and ethnicity group, insurance type, or marital status.

CONCLUSIONS

SVI score does not affect rate of prenatal diagnosis. Findings may differ in other geographic regions and populations.

Disparities in access to reproductive genetic services associated with geographic location of residence and maternal race and ethnicity

PURPOSE

To describe the association between geographic location of residence and use of aneuploidy screening or prenatal genetic counseling and how it is modified by maternal race and ethnicity.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort of individuals at a tertiary care center between 2017-2019. County of residence was classified as rural or metropolitan based in US Office of Management and Budget 2019 definitions. Maternal race and ethnicity were self-identified. Our composite outcome was defined as use of aneuploidy screening or genetic counseling visit. The composite outcome was compared by geographic location and ethnicity. Logistic regression was used to model the relationship between geographic location and the composite outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 8774 pregnancies were included. Of these, 4770 (54%) had genetic screening, and 3781 (43%) had at least 1 genetic counseling visit. Rural patients were significantly less likely to have the composite outcome compared with metropolitan peers (37.1% vs 47.2%, P < .001). In addition, we identified differences in the composite outcome between White rural patients and LatinX rural patients (37.7% vs 35.6%, P < .001) and between Asian rural patients and LatinX and Black rural patients (41.0% vs 35.6%, P < .001; 41.0% vs 36.8%, P < .001). Logistic regression demonstrated that rural patients were significantly less likely to have the composite outcome compared with metropolitan peers, after adjusting for LatinX ethnicity and gestational age at first prenatal visit (OR 0.72, [0.55, 0.95], P = .002).

CONCLUSION

Rural, minority patients were significantly less likely to receive reproductive genetic services compared with metropolitan peers extending our knowledge of disparities in maternity care.

Use of Maternal Race and Weight Provides Equitable Performance in Serum Screening for Open Neural Tube Defects

BACKGROUND

Maternal serum alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) levels are used in screening for open neural tube defects (ONTD). Historical reports show that AFP levels and maternal weights are higher in self-reported Black than White individuals, but recent reports question the need to account for these variables in screening. Our study compares screening performance with and without accounting for race.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was performed on deidentified prenatal screening records including maternal weight and self-reported race of White or Black. Gestational age-specific medians and weight-adjusted multiples of the median levels were calculated separately for each group and using a race-agnostic analysis. Outcome measures included the proportion of screen-positive results.

RESULTS

Records for analysis (n = 13 316) had an ultrasound confirmed gestational age between 15 and 21 completed weeks, singleton pregnancy, and self-reported race. Race was Black for 26.3%. AFP levels for pregnancies in Black individuals were higher than in White individuals: 6% to 11% depending on gestational age. Race-specific gestational age and maternal weight analyses resulted in similar screen-positive rates for self-reported White and Black individuals at 0.74% vs 1.00%, respectively (P = 0.14). However, use of race-agnostic analyses resulted in a screen-positive rate that was 2.4 times higher in Black than White individuals (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

These data show that the historical method of accounting for maternal race and weight in prenatal screening for ONTD provides equitable performance. Using a race-agnostic methodology results in an increased screen-positive rate and a disproportionate rate of required follow-up care for individuals who self-identify as Black.

Patient experiences with prenatal cell-free DNA screening in a safety net setting

OBJECTIVES

Thirty-five states, including Florida, now cover cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening of fetuses for all pregnant patients enrolled in state public insurance programs. We interviewed Black and Hispanic obstetric patients at a safety net clinic in Florida shortly after the state rolled out cfDNA as a first-tier screening method for publicly insured patients.

METHODS

Black and Hispanic patients receiving prenatal care from a prenatal or maternal fetal medicine clinic at a federally qualified health center in Jacksonville, FL were invited to participate in a qualitative interview in English or Spanish to explore experiences and perceptions of prenatal cfDNA screening. Participants were recruited following their first prenatal visit when cfDNA is typically introduced. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed for iterative themes based on principles of grounded theory.

RESULTS

One hundred Black and Hispanic patients (n = 51 non-Hispanic Black, n = 43 Hispanic, n = 3 Hispanic Black, n = 3 Not Reported/Other) completed an interview. Participants described minimal opportunity for pre-screening counseling and limited health literacy about cfDNA or its uses. Some believed that cfDNA could positively impact pregnancy health. Many were unsure if they had received cfDNA even though they were aware of the information provided by it. Most participants expressed an interest in cfDNA as a means for early detection of fetal sex and as an additional indication of general fetal health.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient experiences indicate limited informed consent and decision-making for cfDNA, discordant with professional guidelines on pre-screen counseling. Our findings suggest that there should be additional investment in implementing cfDNA in safety net settings to ensure that patients and providers receive the support necessary for effective patient counseling and follow-on care for the ethical implementation of cfDNA.

Redesigning the First Prenatal Visit: A Quality Improvement Initiative

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

In an era of rising maternal mortality, a thorough first prenatal visit is essential; however, in our clinic we confirmed that many important topics were not being addressed. To rectify this problem, we redesigned the first prenatal visit to improve the coverage of topics, collect social determinants of health, increase patient access, and maintain patient satisfaction.

METHODS

We designed a quality improvement project to improve the first prenatal visit in a faculty obstetrics and gynecology clinic. To assess effectiveness, data before and after the implementation were compared. The intervention divided the first prenatal visit into two patient encounters: a nurse-led telemedicine visit and an in-person visit with an obstetric clinician.

RESULTS

The median percentage of topics covered in the first prenatal visit increased from 70.0% to 95.6%, and improvements were observed for all key themes ( p < .001). Social determinants of health was routinely collected postintervention (98.8%). A reduction in no-shows (9.9%-4.2%) improved patient access for all patients. Patient satisfaction for the first prenatal visit remained unchanged ( p = .370).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant improvements in addressing important topics at the first prenatal visit are achievable by separating one prenatal visit into two visits while increasing patient access and maintaining high patient satisfaction.

“Let’s Just Wait Until She’s Born”: Temporal Factors That Shape Decision-Making for Prenatal Genomic Sequencing Amongst Families Underrepresented in Genomic Research

Genomic sequencing has been increasingly utilized for prenatal diagnosis in recent years and this trend is likely to continue. However, decision-making for parents in the prenatal period is particularly fraught, and prenatal sequencing would significantly expand the complexity of managing health risk information, reproductive options, and healthcare access. This qualitative study investigates decision-making processes amongst parents who enrolled or declined to enroll in the prenatal arm of the California-based Program in Prenatal and Pediatric Genome Sequencing (P3EGS), a study in the Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium that offered whole exome sequencing for fetal anomalies with a focus on underrepresented groups in genomic research. Drawing on the views of 18 prenatal families who agreed to be interviewed after enrolling (n = 15) or declining to enroll (n = 3) in P3EGS, we observed that the timing of sequencing, coupled with unique considerations around experiences of time during pregnancy and prenatal testing, intersect with structural supports beyond the clinic to produce preferences for and against prenatal sequencing and to contain the threat of unwelcome, uncertain knowledge. Particularly for those without structural supports, finding out consequential information may be more palatable after the birth, when the first stage of the uncertain future has been revealed. Future research should examine the role of temporality in decision-making around prenatal genomic sequencing across diverse population cohorts, in order to observe more precisely the role that structural barriers play in patient preferences.

Insurance and Geographic Variations in Non-invasive Prenatal Testing

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.