Prenatal screening and diagnosis: a survey of health care providers' knowledge and attitudes

Risk and uncertainty: shifting decision making for aneuploidy screening to the first trimester of pregnancy

PURPOSE

The clinical introduction of first trimester aneuploidy screening uniquely challenges the informed consent process for both patients and providers. This study investigated key aspects of the decision-making process for this new form of prenatal genetic screening.

METHODS

Qualitative data were collected by nine focus groups that comprised women of different reproductive histories (N = 46 participants). Discussions explored themes regarding patient decision making for first trimester aneuploidy screening. Sessions were audio recorded, transcribed, coded, and analyzed to identify themes.

RESULTS

Multiple levels of uncertainty characterize the decision-making process for first trimester aneuploidy screening. Baseline levels of uncertainty existed for participants in the context of an early pregnancy and the debate about the benefit of fetal genetic testing in general. Additional sources of uncertainty during the decision-making process were generated from weighing the advantages and disadvantages of initiating screening in the first trimester as opposed to waiting until the second. Questions of the quality and quantity of information and the perceived benefit of earlier access to fetal information were leading themes. Barriers to access prenatal care in early pregnancy presented participants with additional concerns about the ability to make informed decisions about prenatal genetic testing.

CONCLUSIONS

The option of the first trimester aneuploidy screening test in early pregnancy generates decision-making uncertainty that can interfere with the informed consent process. Mechanisms must be developed to facilitate informed decision making for this new form of prenatal genetic screening.

Exploring general practitioners' experience of informing women about prenatal screening tests for foetal abnormalities: a qualitative focus group study

Background

Recent developments have made screening tests for foetal abnormalities available earlier in pregnancy and women have a range of testing options accessible to them. It is now recommended that all women, regardless of their age, are provided with information on prenatal screening tests. General Practitioners (GPs) are often the first health professionals a woman consults in pregnancy. As such, GPs are well positioned to inform women of the increasing range of prenatal screening tests available. The aim of this study was to explore GPs experience of informing women of prenatal genetic screening tests for foetal abnormality.

Methods

A qualitative study consisting of four focus groups was conducted in metropolitan and rural Victoria, Australia. A discussion guide was used and the audio-taped transcripts were independently coded by two researchers using thematic analysis. Multiple coders and analysts and informant feedback were employed to reduce the potential for researcher bias and increase the validity of the findings.

Results

Six themes were identified and classified as 'intrinsic' if they occurred within the context of the consultation or 'extrinsic' if they consisted of elements that impacted on the GP beyond the scope of the consultation. The three intrinsic themes were the way GPs explained the limitations of screening, the extent to which GPs provided information selectively and the time pressures at play. The three extrinsic factors were GPs' attitudes and values towards screening, the conflict they experienced in offering screening information and the sense of powerlessness within the screening test process and the health care system generally. Extrinsic themes reveal GPs' attitudes and values to screening and to disability, as well as raising questions about the fundamental premise of testing.

Conclusion

The increasing availability and utilisation of screening tests, in particular first trimester tests, has expanded GPs' role in facilitating women's informed decision-making. Recognition of the importance of providing this complex information warrants longer consultations to respond to the time pressures that GPs experience. Understanding the intrinsic and extrinsic factors that impact on GPs may serve to shape educational resources to be more appropriate, relevant and supportive.

Evaluation of a decision aid for prenatal testing of fetal abnormalities: a cluster randomised trial [ISRCTN22532458]

BACKGROUND

By providing information on the relative merits and potential harms of the options available and a framework to clarify preferences, decision aids can improve knowledge and realistic expectations and decrease decisional conflict in individuals facing decisions between alternative forms of action. Decision-making about prenatal testing for fetal abnormalities is often confusing and difficult for women and the effectiveness of decision aids in this field has not been established. This study aims to test whether a decision aid for prenatal testing of fetal abnormalities, when compared to a pamphlet, improves women's informed decision-making and decreases decisional conflict.

METHODS/DESIGN

A cluster designed randomised controlled trial is being conducted in Victoria, Australia. Fifty General Practitioners (GPs) have been randomised to one of two arms: providing women with either a decision aid or a pamphlet. The two primary outcomes will be measured by comparing the difference in percentages of women identified as making an informed choice and the difference in mean decisional conflict scores between the two groups. Data will be collected from women using questionnaires at 14 weeks and 24 weeks gestation. The sample size of 159 women in both arms of the trial has been calculated to detect a difference of 18% (50 to 68%) in informed choice between the two groups. The required numbers have been adjusted to accommodate the cluster design, miscarriage and participant lost--to--follow up. Baseline characteristics of women will be summarised for both arms of the trial. Similarly, characteristics of GPs will be compared between arms. Differences in the primary outcomes will be analysed using 'intention-to-treat' principles. Appropriate regression techniques will adjust for the effects of clustering and include covariates to adjust for the stratifying variable and major potential confounding factors.

DISCUSSION

The findings from this trial will make a significant contribution to improving women's experience of prenatal testing and will have application to a variety of maternity care settings. The evaluation of a tailored decision aid will also have implications for pregnancy care providers by identifying whether or not such a resource will support their role in providing prenatal testing information.

Educating general practitioners about prenatal testing: approaches and challenges

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects of an education intervention on the knowledge and practice behaviours of general practitioners (GPs) regarding prenatal screening and diagnostic testing in Melbourne, Australia.

METHODS

A single group, pre-test, repeated post-test design was used. Information on demographics, knowledge, behaviours and skills was collected via a self-administered questionnaire prior to the educational intervention. Responses to individual questions were coded and scores calculated, as well as a percent total score. Following the education, data were again collected, immediately afterwards (Post-Q) and six-to-eight months later (Foll-Q).

RESULTS

Data for all three time points were collected from 63 GPs and showed a variable, and relatively poor knowledge regarding aspects of prenatal testing, especially before education. The percent mean total score at baseline was 51.2+/-1.59% (CI 48.02 to 54.39), which increased significantly (p<0.001) in both Post-Q (62.88+/-1.51%; CI 59.86 to 65.89) and Foll-Q (58.92+/-1.6%; CI 55.71 to 62.12).

CONCLUSION

The educational intervention significantly increased knowledge and practice behaviour of GPs, even up to eight months later, but this could be improved further, to a considerable extent. There is a need for ongoing multi-faceted approaches to educating GPs on prenatal testing to ensure that they are engaged in appropriate practice.