1
|
Collart C, Craighead C, Yao M, Chien EK, Rose S, Frankel RM, Coleridge M, Hu B, Edmonds BT, Ranzini AC, Farrell RM. Identifying Strategies to Improve Shared Decision Making for Pregnant Patients' Decisions about Prenatal Genetic Screens and Diagnostic Tests. Med Decis Making 2024; 44:689-704. [PMID: 39082665 DOI: 10.1177/0272989x241259016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/27/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Prenatal genetic screens and diagnostic tests are vital components of prenatal care. The first prenatal visit is a critical time in the decision-making process when patients decide whether to use these tests in addition to address a series of other essential prenatal care aspects. We conducted this study to examine the role of a shared decision-making (SDM) instrument to support these discussions. METHODS We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial of patients allocated to an SDM tool or usual care at their first prenatal visit. Participants completed a baseline survey to measure decision-making needs and preferences. Direct observation was conducted and analyzed using the OPTION scale to measure SDM during prenatal genetic testing discussions. RESULTS Levels of SDM were similar across groups (P = 0.081). The highest levels of SDM were observed during screening test discussions (NEST 2.4 ± 0.9 v. control 2.6 ± 1.0). Lowest levels were observed in discussions about patients' preference for risk versus diagnostic information (NEST 1.0 ± 1.1 v. control 1.2 ± 1.3). CONCLUSION Study findings demonstrate the need for targeted patient-focused and provider-focused efforts to improve SDM to enhance patients' informed decision making about these options. Importantly, patients' baseline knowledge and attitudes need to be considered given that patients with less knowledge may need more carefully crafted communication. HIGHLIGHTS Choices about whether, when, and how to use prenatal genetic tests are highly preference-based decisions, with patients' baseline attitudes about these options as a major driver in health care discussions.The decision-making process is also shaped by patient preferences regarding a shared or informed decision-making process for medical decisions that are highly personal and have significant ramifications for obstetric outcomes.There is a need to develop targeted efforts to improve decision making and enhance patients' ability to make informed decisions about prenatal genetic tests in early pregnancy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christina Collart
- Obstetrics & Gynecology Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Caitlin Craighead
- Obstetrics & Gynecology Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Meng Yao
- Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Edward K Chien
- Obstetrics & Gynecology Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Susannah Rose
- Experience Safety, Quality and Patient Experience, Clinical Transformation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | | | - Marissa Coleridge
- Obstetrics & Gynecology Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland OH, USA
| | - Bo Hu
- Quantitative Health Sciences, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | | | - Angela C Ranzini
- Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The MetroHealth System, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Ruth M Farrell
- Obstetrics & Gynecology Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland OH, USA
- Center for Bioethics, Clinical Transformation, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Michie M. Is preparation a good reason for prenatal genetic testing? Ethical and critical questions. Birth Defects Res 2021; 112:332-338. [PMID: 32115901 DOI: 10.1002/bdr2.1651] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/09/2020] [Accepted: 01/10/2020] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
As prenatal genetic testing technologies have become both easier and more accessible, women are increasingly choosing prenatal genetic testing for a reason that is largely unexamined in the clinical literature: preparation. This reasoning, offered not only from pregnant women but frequently from testing laboratories and health care providers, reflects long-held assumptions that prenatal genetic results-properly delivered and followed with information, clinical surveillance, and/or social supports-prepare families for a child with a genetic condition, and even improve health and social outcomes for children and families. But these assumptions remain unexamined, since there are no clear definitions or recommendations for prenatal preparation. Preparation may refer to several overlapping ways in which prenatal information may change parents' approach to the rest of the pregnancy, including: (a) clinical activities, including surveillance, interventions, and delivery planning; (b) social and informational support, such as interacting with patient support groups and gathering information about quality of life; and (c) psychological "coping" or adjustments to the reality of raising a child with a genetic condition. These meanings and activities intersect and influence one another and form a foundation for postnatal family adaptation, but they are rarely parsed out in studies examining the impact of prenatal diagnosis. Based on previous work delineating conceptual models as middle terms between theory and reality, we are building a conceptual model that incorporates an empirical understanding of meanings and actions encompassed by prenatal preparation. Comparing diverse families' expectations with the resources they are offered can identify (mis)matches between priorities and approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marsha Michie
- Department of Bioethics, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Stoll K, Jackson J. Supporting Patient Autonomy and Informed Decision-Making in Prenatal Genetic Testing. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med 2020; 10:cshperspect.a036509. [PMID: 31615869 DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a036509] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023]
Abstract
Genetic counselors have both the burden and the privilege of supporting patients who are faced with making difficult decisions. In the prenatal setting, genetic counselors are responsible for reviewing a growing list of prenatal testing options for patients with the goal of helping people to anticipate the potential consequences of their decision. Prenatal genetic counselors also support patients in making decisions about the next steps after clinical evaluation has indicated a genetic condition, birth defect, or information of uncertain clinical significance in the fetus. The information provided and choices patients face in the context of prenatal and reproductive genetics can be life-altering, and decisions often must be made within a short window of time. It is imperative that the needs and preferences of each patient are considered and that individuals are empowered to make active decisions that are consistent with their needs and values. Here we will review the history of the role of the genetic counselor in the prenatal setting and will provide strategies and tools for supporting informed patient decision-making in the face of an increasingly complex reproductive genetic testing landscape.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katie Stoll
- Genetic Support Foundation, Olympia, Washington 98502, USA
| | - Judith Jackson
- Department of Genetic Counseling, Brandeis University, Waltham, Massachusetts 02453, USA.,Department of Maternal Fetal Medicine, South Shore Health, South Weymouth, Massachusetts 02190, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
van Bruggen MJ, Henneman L, Timmermans DRM. Women's decision making regarding prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy: A qualitative comparison between 2003 and 2016. Midwifery 2018; 64:93-100. [PMID: 29990629 DOI: 10.1016/j.midw.2018.06.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/16/2018] [Revised: 06/07/2018] [Accepted: 06/08/2018] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Situational factors of prenatal screening have changed in recent decades. To explore the effect of a changing context on women's decision making, differences and similarities in the decision-making process of pregnant women regarding prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy between two periods in time were studied. DESIGN A qualitative comparison was made between a dataset of 22 semi-structured interviews with pregnant women from 2003 and a newly collected dataset with 19 semi-structured interviews from 2016. FINDINGS Overall, women reported similar considerations in their decision-making process in 2003 and 2016, suggesting that decision making has not essentially changed. In 2016, women were still making a deliberate decision, however for some women costs and societal views as to what is acceptable did appear to impact the decision-making process. Moreover, new screening possibilities (e.g. improved test characteristics and including more conditions to be screened) seemed to impact the decision outcome. CONCLUSIONS Since most women based their decisions mainly on their personal values and personal experiences rather than on situational factors, the results suggest that the changing context with regard to prenatal screening had no major effect on women's decision making. It therefore seems unlikely that future changes in the field of prenatal screening will drastically change the decision-making process of pregnant women as long as informed and deliberate decision making is safeguarded.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Metje J van Bruggen
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Section of Community Genetics, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lidewij Henneman
- Department of Clinical Genetics, Section of Community Genetics, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Reproduction and Development, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Daniëlle R M Timmermans
- Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Public and Occupational Health, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Cameron LD, Biesecker BB, Peters E, Taber JM, Klein WMP. Self-Regulation Principles Underlying Risk Perception and Decision Making within the Context of Genomic Testing. SOCIAL AND PERSONALITY PSYCHOLOGY COMPASS 2017; 11. [PMID: 29225669 DOI: 10.1111/spc3.12315] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
Advances in theory and research on self-regulation and decision-making processes have yielded important insights into how cognitive, emotional, and social processes shape risk perceptions and risk-related decisions. We examine how self-regulation theory can be applied to inform our understanding of decision-making processes within the context of genomic testing, a clinical arena in which individuals face complex risk information and potentially life-altering decisions. After presenting key principles of self-regulation, we present a genomic testing case example to illustrate how principles related to risk representations, approach and avoidance motivations, emotion regulation, defensive responses, temporal construals, and capacities such as numeric abilities can shape decisions and psychological responses during the genomic testing process. We conclude with implications for using self-regulation theory to advance science within genomic testing and opportunities for how this research can inform further developments in self-regulation theory.
Collapse
|
6
|
A Framework for Describing the Influence of Service Organisation and Delivery on Participation in Fetal Anomaly Screening in England. J Pregnancy 2017; 2017:4975091. [PMID: 28421145 PMCID: PMC5380857 DOI: 10.1155/2017/4975091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/29/2016] [Revised: 02/14/2017] [Accepted: 02/22/2017] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective. The aim of this research was to explore the influence of service organisation and delivery on providers and users' interactions and decision-making in the context of Down's syndrome screening. Methods. A qualitative descriptive study involving online interviews conducted with a purposive sample of 34 community midwives, 35 pregnant women, and 15 partners from two maternity services in different health districts in England. Data were analysed using a combination of grounded theory principles and content analysis and a framework was developed. Results. The main emerging concepts were organisational constraints, power, routinisation, and tensions. Providers were concerned about being time-limited that encouraged routine, minimal information-giving and lacked skills to check users' understanding. Users reported their participation was influenced by providers' attitudes, the ambience of the environment, asymmetric power relations, and the offer and perception of screening as a routine test. Discordance between the national programme's policy of nondirective informed choice and providers' actions of recommending and arranging screening appointments was unexpected. Additionally, providers and users differing perceptions of emotional effects of information, beliefs, and expectations created tensions within them, between them, and in the antenatal environment. Conclusions. A move towards a social model of care may be beneficial to empower service users and create less tension for providers and users.
Collapse
|
7
|
Chen SC, Wasserman DT. A Framework for Unrestricted Prenatal Whole-Genome Sequencing: Respecting and Enhancing the Autonomy of Prospective Parents. THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF BIOETHICS : AJOB 2017; 17:3-18. [PMID: 27996923 DOI: 10.1080/15265161.2016.1251632] [Citation(s) in RCA: 39] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
Noninvasive, prenatal whole genome sequencing (NIPW) may be a technological reality in the near future, making available a vast array of genetic information early in pregnancy at no risk to the fetus or mother. Many worry that the timing, safety, and ease of the test will lead to informational overload and reproductive consumerism. The prevailing response among commentators has been to restrict conditions eligible for testing based on medical severity, which imposes disputed value judgments and devalues those living with eligible conditions. To avoid these difficulties, we propose an unrestricted testing policy, under which prospective parents could obtain information on any variant of known significance after a careful informed consent process that uses an interactive decision aid to deliver a mandatory presentation on the purposes, techniques, and limitations of genomic testing, as well as optional resources for reflection and consultation. This process would encourage thoughtful, informed deliberation by prospective parents before deciding whether or how to use NIPW.
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
AIM To report an analysis of the concept of risk perception in pregnancy. BACKGROUND Pregnant women are increasingly exposed to the view that pregnancy and childbirth are intrinsically dangerous, requiring medical monitoring and management. Societal pressures are applied to women that dictate appropriate behaviours during pregnancy. These changes have resulted in increased perception of risk for pregnant women. DESIGN Walker and Avant's method was selected to guide this analysis. DATA SOURCES Peer-reviewed articles published in English from CINAHL, Scopus, PubMed and Psychinfo. No date limits were applied. METHODS Thematic analysis was conducted on 79 articles. Attributes, antecedents and consequences of the concept were identified. RESULTS The attributes of the concept are the possibility of harm to mother or infant and beliefs about the severity of the risk state. The physical condition of pregnancy combined with the cognitive ability to perceive a personal risk state is antecedents. Risk perception in pregnancy influences women's affective state and has an impact on decision-making about pregnancy and childbirth. There are limited empirical referents with which to measure the concept. CONCLUSION Women today know more about their developing infant than at any other time in history; however, this has not led to a sense of reassurance. Nurses and midwives have a critical role in assisting pregnant women, and their families make sense of the information they are exposed to. An understanding of the complexities of the concept of risk perception in pregnancy may assist in enabling nurses and midwives to reaffirm the normalcy of pregnancy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suzanne Lydia Lennon
- College of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Abstract
Genetic carrier screening, prenatal screening for aneuploidy, and prenatal diagnostic testing have expanded dramatically over the past 2 decades. Driven in part by powerful market forces, new complex testing modalities have become available after limited clinical research. The responsibility for offering these tests lies primarily on the obstetrical care provider and has become more burdensome as the number of testing options expands. Genetic testing in pregnancy is optional, and decisions about undergoing tests, as well as follow-up testing, should be informed and based on individual patients' values and needs. Careful pre- and post-test counseling is central to supporting informed decision-making. This article explores three areas of technical expansion in genetic testing: expanded carrier screening, non-invasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidies using cell-free DNA, and diagnostic testing using fetal chromosomal microarray testing, and provides insights aimed at enabling the obstetrical practitioner to better support patients considering these tests.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jill Fonda Allen
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The George Washington University, 2150 Pennsylvania Ave, NW Washington, DC 20037.
| | - Katie Stoll
- Genetic Support Foundation, Olympia, WA; Providence Health & Services, Olympia, WA
| | - Barbara A Bernhardt
- Division of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Walser SA, Kellom KS, Palmer SC, Bernhardt BA. Comparing genetic counselor's and patient's perceptions of needs in prenatal chromosomal microarray testing. Prenat Diagn 2015; 35:870-8. [PMID: 25995037 DOI: 10.1002/pd.4624] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/10/2015] [Revised: 05/13/2015] [Accepted: 05/17/2015] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Chromosome microarray analysis is poised to take a significant place in the prenatal setting given its increased yield over standard karyotyping, but concerns regarding ethical and counseling challenges remain, especially associated with the risk of uncertain and incidental findings. Guidelines recommend patients receiving prenatal screening to undergo genetic counseling prior to testing, but little is known about women's specific pre-testing and post-testing informational needs, as well as their preference for return of various types of results. METHODS The present study surveys 199 prenatal genetic counselors who have counseled patients undergoing chromosome microarray analysis testing and 152 women who have undergone testing on the importance of understanding pre-test information, return of various types of results, and resources made available following an abnormal finding. RESULTS Counselors and patients agree on many aspects, although findings indicate patients consider all available information very important, while genetic counselors give more varying ratings. CONCLUSION Counseling sessions would benefit from information personalized to a patient's particular needs and a shared decision-making model, to reduce informational overload and avoid unnecessary anxiety. Additionally, policies regarding the return of various types of results are needed. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah A Walser
- Division of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Katherine S Kellom
- Division of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Steven C Palmer
- Abramson Cancer Center, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Barbara A Bernhardt
- Division of Translational Medicine and Human Genetics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Farrell RM, Nutter B, Agatisa PK. Patient-Centered Prenatal Counseling: Aligning Obstetric Healthcare Professionals With Needs of Pregnant Women. Women Health 2015; 55:280-96. [DOI: 10.1080/03630242.2014.996724] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
|
12
|
Rebouché R. Non-Invasive Testing, Non-Invasive Counseling. THE JOURNAL OF LAW, MEDICINE & ETHICS : A JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LAW, MEDICINE & ETHICS 2015; 43:228-240. [PMID: 26242943 DOI: 10.1111/jlme.12237] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
This article describes a new prenatal genetic test that is painless, early, and increasingly available. State legislatures have reacted by prohibiting abortion for reason of fetal sex or of fetal diagnosis and managing genetic counseling. This article explores these legislative responses and considers how physicians and genetic counselors currently communicate post-testing options. The article then examines the challenges ahead for genetic counseling, particularly in light of the troubling grip of abortion politics on conversations about prenatal diagnosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rachel Rebouché
- Associate Professor of Law at Temple University Beasley School of Law. She received her J.D. from Harvard Law School, LL.M. from Queen's University, Belfast, and B.A. from Trinity University. She teaches family law, health care finance and regulation, and comparative family law
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Ames AG, Metcalfe SA, Archibald AD, Duncan RE, Emery J. Measuring informed choice in population-based reproductive genetic screening: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet 2015; 23:8-21. [PMID: 24848746 PMCID: PMC4266751 DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2014.89] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2013] [Revised: 03/11/2014] [Accepted: 04/10/2014] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
Genetic screening and health-care guidelines recommend that programmes should facilitate informed choice. It is therefore important that accurate measures of informed choice are available to evaluate such programmes. This review synthesises and appraises measures used to evaluate informed choice in population-based genetic screening programmes for reproductive risk. Databases were searched for studies offering genetic screening for the purpose of establishing reproductive risk to an adult population sample, in which aspects of informed choice were measured. Studies were included if, at a minimum, measures of uptake of screening and knowledge were used. Searches identified 1462 citations and 76 studies were reviewed in full text; 34 studies met the inclusion criteria. Over 20 different measures of informed choice were used. Many measures lacked adequate validity and reliability data. This systematic review will inform future evaluation of informed choice in population genetic screening programmes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alice Grace Ames
- Genetics Education and Health Research, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Sylvia Ann Metcalfe
- Genetics Education and Health Research, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Alison Dalton Archibald
- Genetics Education and Health Research, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Victorian Clinical Genetics Services, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Rony Emily Duncan
- Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Centre for Adolescent Health, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
- Health Services Delivery for Adolescents, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jon Emery
- General Practice and Primary Care Academic Centre, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Vanstone M, King C, de Vrijer B, Nisker J. Non-invasive prenatal testing: ethics and policy considerations. JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY CANADA 2014; 36:515-526. [PMID: 24927192 DOI: 10.1016/s1701-2163(15)30568-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
New technologies analyzing fetal DNA in maternal blood have led to the wide commercial availability of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT). We present here for clinicians the ethical and policy issues related to an emerging practice option. Although NIPT presents opportunities for pregnant women, particularly women who are at increased risk of having a baby with an abnormality or who are otherwise likely to access invasive prenatal testing, NIPT brings significant ethics and policy challenges. The ethical issues include multiple aspects of informed decision-making, such as access to counselling about the possible results of the test in advance of making a decision about participation in NIPT. Policy considerations include issues related to offering and promoting a privately available medical strategy in publicly funded institutions. Ethics and policy considerations merge in NIPT with regard to sex selection and support for persons living with disabilities.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Meredith Vanstone
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Hamilton ON
| | - Carol King
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London ON
| | - Barbra de Vrijer
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London ON
| | - Jeff Nisker
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry, Western University, London ON; Children's Health Research Institute, London ON
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Farrell RM, Mercer MB, Agatisa PK, Smith MB, Philipson E. It's More Than a Blood Test: Patients' Perspectives on Noninvasive Prenatal Testing. J Clin Med 2014; 3:614-31. [PMID: 26237393 PMCID: PMC4449684 DOI: 10.3390/jcm3020614] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2014] [Revised: 05/03/2014] [Accepted: 05/06/2014] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) offers pregnant women a new risk assessment tool for fetal aneuploidy that is superior to conventional screening tests. We conducted focus groups with women who were currently pregnant or had recently delivered in the past year to characterize their perspectives about NIPT and to explore factors they would consider during decision making about its use. Women identified accuracy, early timing, testing ease, and determination of fetal sex as advantages of NIPT over other screens, and the noninvasive method of NIPT as an advantage over diagnostic tests. False positive and false negative results, anxiety, cost and insurance coverage were seen as disadvantages of NIPT. Women who do not want fetal aneuploidy information most likely will not undergo NIPT, despite its advantages over other screening tests. However, given its advantages, the decision to have NIPT is straightforward for women who want genetic information about the fetus. Women emphasized the need to make autonomous, private, and informed choices about NIPT, as they would with any prenatal genetic testing option. These perspectives may guide clinicians to conduct effective and clinically relevant counseling with pregnant women who consider utilizing this new genetic technology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth M Farrell
- Department of Bioethics, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue JJ60, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic Women's Health Institute, 9500 Euclid Avenue A81, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic Center for Personalized Genetic Healthcare, 9500 Euclid Avenue NE50, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
| | - Mary Beth Mercer
- Department of Bioethics, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue JJ60, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
| | - Patricia K Agatisa
- Department of Bioethics, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue JJ60, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
| | - Marissa B Smith
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic Center for Personalized Genetic Healthcare, 9500 Euclid Avenue NE50, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
| | - Elliot Philipson
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cleveland Clinic Women's Health Institute, 9500 Euclid Avenue A81, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Constantine ML, Allyse M, Wall M, Vries RD, Rockwood TH. Imperfect informed consent for prenatal screening: Lessons from the Quad screen. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2013. [DOI: 10.1177/1477750913511339] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Objective The study evaluated patient informed consent (IC) for the Quad screen and examined differences in IC between test acceptors and test refusers. A multidimensional model of IC was used. Methods Women seeking prenatal care at nine obstetrics clinics in a large Midwestern city completed surveys between February and December 2006. Surveys contained measures for three dimensions of IC: intention, understanding and controlling influence. Results 56.2% of women did not meet criteria for all three of our dimensions of IC and therefore failed to give it. The failure rate was higher among women who choose to screen (72.6%) than women who choose not screen (50%) (p < 0.001). Women who met all criteria for IC were over three times less likley to choose to screen (or = 0.32, CI 0.17–0.62 ( p < 0.01)) than women who did not meet criteria for IC. Conclusion The decision to screen for fetal anomalies is less of a deliberated action than the decision not to screen. Women who lack a fundamental understanding of the purpose and nature of the screen may be operating on the belief that the screen is part of standard care and presents no need to deliberate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- ML Constantine
- Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
| | - M Allyse
- Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
| | - M Wall
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
| | - R De Vries
- Center for Bioethics and Social Sciences in Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
- Department of Medical Education/Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
- Academie Verloskunde Maastricht/Zuyd University; CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care/Maastricht University, Maastricht, NL
| | - TH Rockwood
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Allyse M, Sayres LC, King JS, Norton ME, Cho MK. Cell-free fetal DNA testing for fetal aneuploidy and beyond: clinical integration challenges in the US context. Hum Reprod 2012; 27:3123-31. [PMID: 22863603 PMCID: PMC3472618 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/des286] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
The recent release of new, non-invasive prenatal tests for fetal aneuploidy using cell-free fetal DNA (cffDNA) has been hailed as a revolution in prenatal testing and has triggered significant commercial interest in the field. Ongoing research portends the arrival of a wide range of cffDNA tests. However, it is not yet clear how these tests will be integrated into well-established prenatal testing strategies in the USA, as the timing of such testing and the degree to which new non-invasive tests will supplement or replace existing screening and diagnostic tools remain uncertain. We argue that there is an urgent need for policy-makers, regulators and professional societies to provide guidance on the most efficient and ethical manner for such tests to be introduced into clinical practice in the USA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Megan Allyse
- Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, Stanford, CA 94305-5417, USA.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Women's experiences receiving abnormal prenatal chromosomal microarray testing results. Genet Med 2012; 15:139-45. [PMID: 22955112 DOI: 10.1038/gim.2012.113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 159] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Genomic microarrays can detect copy-number variants not detectable by conventional cytogenetics. This technology is diffusing rapidly into prenatal settings even though the clinical implications of many copy-number variants are currently unknown. We conducted a qualitative pilot study to explore the experiences of women receiving abnormal results from prenatal microarray testing performed in a research setting. METHODS Participants were a subset of women participating in a multicenter prospective study "Prenatal Cytogenetic Diagnosis by Array-based Copy Number Analysis." Telephone interviews were conducted with 23 women receiving abnormal prenatal microarray results. RESULTS We found that five key elements dominated the experiences of women who had received abnormal prenatal microarray results: an offer too good to pass up, blindsided by the results, uncertainty and unquantifiable risks, need for support, and toxic knowledge. CONCLUSION As prenatal microarray testing is increasingly used, uncertain findings will be common, resulting in greater need for careful pre- and posttest counseling, and more education of and resources for providers so they can adequately support the women who are undergoing testing.
Collapse
|
19
|
Supporting patients after disclosure of abnormal first trimester screening results. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2012; 24:109-13. [PMID: 22327735 DOI: 10.1097/gco.0b013e3283505b4f] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW The clinical value of first trimester aneuploidy screening is well established internationally. The implementation of a more effective testing protocol has led to an increase in 'abnormal' or worrying findings that are disclosed to women relatively early in their pregnancy. It is timely, therefore, to explore the support needs of women who are told during the first trimester that their screening result has increased their risk of fetal anomaly. RECENT FINDINGS A Medline search uncovered numerous papers in the review period on first trimester screening regimens, and the efficacy of particular screening markers, but very little on the psychosocial sequelae for women receiving abnormal results. Therefore, this study takes what can be gleaned from the available literature, augmented by the author's experience in an independent UK charity providing nondirective support and information to parents through prenatal screening and its consequences. [Antenatal Results and Choices (ARC) was established as a UK charity in 1988. The organization provides nondirective information and specialized support to parents throughout antenatal testing and its consequences, dealing with approximately 8000 contacts a year. ARC also provides training programmes for providers in communication skills and supporting decision-making. www.arc-uk.org.] SUMMARY With the shift in timing of screening programmes, there has been an emphasis in the literature on concerns about the provision of pretest information and counselling rather than what women find beneficial when dealing with results. The emotional impact of worrying news will always be significant and the ensuing decisions complex. The challenge for providers is to have a flexibility of approach that enables women and couples to be supported to understand the possible clinical implications of a screening result and what this might mean to them in the context of their individual lives.
Collapse
|
20
|
Farrell RM, Nutter B, Agatisa PK. Meeting patients' education and decision-making needs for first trimester prenatal aneuploidy screening. Prenat Diagn 2011; 31:1222-8. [PMID: 22024939 DOI: 10.1002/pd.2867] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2011] [Revised: 08/16/2011] [Accepted: 08/17/2011] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE First trimester aneuploidy screening introduces unique challenges to patient education and informed decision-making. Our study assessed the decision-making process among those pregnant patients presenting for this new form of aneuploidy screening. METHOD A survey instrument was used to assess components of decision-making among women who presented for first trimester aneuploidy screening. Knowledge and leading factors in the decision-making process were measured. RESULTS Participants (n = 139) demonstrated understanding of the etiology of Down syndrome, but less understanding of its cognitive (65.2%) and physical manifestations (58.7%). Few were able to determine risk from first trimester screen results (36.7%). Participants were more familiar with amniocentesis (84.2%) than chorionic villus sampling (73.4%), though less familiar with procedural risks (29.5% and 28.1%, respectively). The majority of participants ranked the following as key information in their decision: knowledge of their intentions about the outcome of the pregnancy based on the test results (92.4%), knowledge of chorionic villus sampling to evaluate an abnormal result (92.0%), and values and beliefs about termination (89.1%). CONCLUSION First trimester aneuploidy screening generates education and decision-making benchmarks for patients and providers. It is important to address these barriers as this new screen becomes a growing part of current prenatal genetic testing offerings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth M Farrell
- Departments of Bioethics, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|