Balancing Needs and Autonomy: The Involvement of Pregnant Women's Partners in Decisions About cfDNA

Conditions for autonomous reproductive decision-making in prenatal screening: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women should be able to make autonomous and meaningful decisions about prenatal screening for fetal abnormalities. It remains largely unclear which circumstances facilitate or hinder such a decision-making process.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate what conditions Dutch pregnant women and professional experts consider important for autonomous reproductive decision-making in prenatal screening for fetal abnormalities, and the extent to which, according to women, those conditions are met in practice.

METHODS

A mixed methods study was conducted in the Netherlands in 2016-2017. A conceptual model was used to interview professional experts (n = 16) and pregnant women (n = 19). Thematic analysis was performed to identify important conditions. Subsequently, a questionnaire assessed the perceived importance of those conditions and the extent to which these were met, in the experience of pregnant women (n = 200).

RESULTS

Professional experts stressed the importance of information provision, and emphasized a rational decision-making model. Pregnant women differed in what information they felt was needed, and this depended on the screening decision made. Questionnaire findings showed that women prioritized discussion and consensus with partners. Information about test accuracy and miscarriage risk of invasive follow-up testing was also considered important. Two key conditions were not adequately met, in the experience of women: (1) having information about miscarriage risk; (2) not being directed by health professionals in decision-making.

CONCLUSION

According to women, discussion and consensus with partners was considered a highly important condition for an autonomous and meaningful decision-making process. Access to information about safety of testing and ensuring that women are not being directed in their decision-making by health professionals seem to be areas for improvement in prenatal care practice.

Patient perspectives on noninvasive prenatal testing among black women in the United States: a scoping review

Advances in reproductive health technologies such as noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) are changing the landscape of prenatal care and maternal health. NIPT, made clinically available in the United States (US) in 2011, is a screening test that utilizes cell-free DNA (cfDNA) to detect for aneuploidies and genetic characteristics in fetal DNA. In September 2020, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommended NIPT for all pregnant patients regardless of age or risk factors. We examined peer-reviewed, empirical studies published from January 2011 to February 2022, assessing NIPT studies with patient perspectives in the US and what is known about how empirical studies include Black women. Our scoping review draws from PubMed (with advanced MeSH search options) and Scopus databases for advanced scoping review, with 33 articles meeting our criteria. Empirical studies on NIPT show patient perceptions range across five themes: 1) accuracy / safety, 2) return of results, 3) patient knowledge, 4) informed consent, and 5) perceptions among minoritized groups (with perceptions of race and gender as a social demographic intersection). Additionally, among the 15 studies that included that Black woman in their study sample, none measured the perceptions of Black women with genetic conditions. Bridging this knowledge gap is critical because NIPT is becoming increasingly accessible across the nation and is being developed to screen for additional genetic conditions, such as sickle cell disease. Ultimately, NIPT researchers need to go to greater lengths to examine the patient perspectives of Black women with and without genetic conditions.

Blurring the divide: Navigating the public/private landscape of fertility treatment in the UK

It is widely assumed that fertility patients in the UK are either privately funded or publicly funded through the National Health Service. This article challenges this distinction and demonstrates how the boundaries between public and private fertility treatment provision are increasingly blurred. It draws on interviews with 42 fertility patients and partners who had accessed in vitro fertilisation (IVF) through both the National Health Service and private providers, to demonstrate how participants were compelled to engage with a consumerist model of healthcare, even when they had access to publicly funded IVF cycles. Patients' experiences of navigating fertility treatment revealed a hybrid public/private consumption landscape, which reflects the uneven process of privatisation across the fertility sector. This article demonstrates how healthcare privatisation has had profound consequences for all IVF patients.

The Impact of Outpatient Prenatal Care Visitor Restrictions on Pregnant Patients and Partners During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Introduction:

Methods:

Results:

Conclusions:

Reproduction and Genetic Responsibility: An Interpretive Description of Reproductive Decision-Making for Young People With Li-Fraumeni Syndrome

The reproductive decision-making of young people (aged 15-39 years) with Li-Fraumeni syndrome (LFS), an early onset inherited cancer syndrome, has not been studied in depth. Using interpretive description methodology, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 30 young Australians (mean age 25.5 years) diagnosed with LFS or at 50% genetic risk. With reflexive thematic analysis, we show how young people's reproductive decision-making and ideals for family formation were shaped by a sense of genetic responsibility to ensure the health of future biological kin. Reproductive technology provided choices for family formation in the context of LFS and also complicated reproductive decisions, as these choices were difficult to understand, make, or carry out. We uphold that reproductive decision-making when living with LFS is a profoundly moral practice that may pose significant challenges for young people navigating their formative years. We offer genetic counseling practice recommendations to support individuals with LFS when making reproductive decisions.

The crafting of hope: Contextualising add-ons in the treatment trajectories of IVF patients

The proliferation and popularity of additional treatments in IVF, also known as add-ons, has generated widespread discussion and controversy in the UK, where concerns have addressed the lack of evidence to support the efficacy and safety of these treatments, their cost, and their connection to a wider context of privatisation of fertility treatment. Drawing on 42 interviews with IVF patients, this article explores the role of hope in the appeal of add-ons from the patient perspective. The analysis is presented in two parts: firstly, we investigate the role of hope in patients' decision-making on treatment, contextualising add-ons in the broader trajectory of their IVF experience; secondly, we examine how patients navigate the offer of add-ons, focusing on the role of hope in how they rationalise their decisions on whether to include them in their fertility treatment. Our analysis shows how patients craft their hope to navigate the increasing number of available options in their quest to find the treatment(s) that will "work" for them. We suggest that the imperative for patients to explore all options is intensified with the emergence of add-ons, which produces a novel context and version of a "hope technology".

The impact of the emergence of COVID-19 on women's prenatal genetic testing decisions

Objective

We conducted a study to examine the impact of COVID on patients' access and utilization of prenatal genetic screens and diagnostic tests at the onset of the COVID‐19 pandemic in the United States.

Methods

We conducted telephone interviews with 40 patients to examine how the pandemic affected prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing decisions during the initial months of the pandemic in the United States. An interview guide queried experiences with the ability to access information about prenatal genetic testing options and to utilize the tests when desired. Audio recordings were transcribed and coded using NVivo 12. Analysis was conducted using Grounded Theory.

Results

The pandemic did not alter most participants' decisions to undergo prenatal genetic testing. Yet, it did impact how participants viewed the risks and benefits of testing and timing of testing. There was heightened anxiety among those who underwent testing, stemming from the risk of viral exposure and the fear of being alone if pregnancy loss or fetal abnormality was identified at the time of an ultrasound‐based procedure.

Conclusion

The pandemic may impact patients' access and utilization of prenatal genetic tests. More research is needed to determine how best to meet pregnant patients' decision‐making needs during this time.

What is already known about this topic?

Prenatal genetic screens and diagnostic tests are a core component to the delivery of high‐quality, evidence‐based prenatal care.

It is critical that pregnant patients have the information and resources to make an informed decision about a growing array of prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing options.

In the decision‐making process, pregnant patients commonly weigh the risks and benefits of gaining genetic information about the fetus with the risks and benefits of the available screens and diagnostic tests.

What does this study add?

The pandemic has led to significant changes in healthcare delivery and insurance benefits for prenatal genetic testing, raising key questions about how pregnant patient are weighing the risks and benefits of the available prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing options against the risks of COVID exposure by presenting to a healthcare facility for testing.

COVID‐19 appears to impact how women view the utility of prenatal genetic testing, including how they weigh the risk and benefits of prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic testing in addition to when in the pregnancy they may elect to undergo testing.

The COVID‐19 pandemic has resulted in increased levels of concern and anxiety that may be encountered by pregnant women in the testing process, raising awareness of the need for additional resources to support patients' decision‐making during the pandemic.

Understanding Decision-Making and Decision Difficulty in Women With an Unintended Pregnancy in the Netherlands

Previous research indicates that a considerable number of women with an unintended pregnancy experience difficulty deciding about continuing or terminating the pregnancy. We examined the decision-making processes of women who experienced high decision difficulty and women who experienced little decision difficulty, to gain insight in the factors that contribute to experienced decision difficulty. Sixty-nine women who had an abortion, and 40 women who had decided to continue their unintended pregnancy, participated in qualitative interviews. We found that women's decision processes varied on 11 relevant criteria. The decision-making processes of women who experienced little decision difficulty differed from that of women who experienced high decision difficulty, but the decision-making processes of women who carried their pregnancy to term and the high decision difficulty abortion group were strikingly similar. Implications of our findings for future research and for professional care for women who are in need of support during decision-making are discussed.