Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Part II-women's perspectives.
Trial by Dutch laboratories for evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing. Part II-women's perspectives.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/pd.4941
复制
发表时间：
2016-12
影响因子：
3
通讯作者：
Henneman, Lidewij
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
van Schendel, Rachel V.;Page-Christiaens, G. C. (Lieve);Beulen, Lean;Bilardo, Catia M.;de Boer, Marjon A.;Coumans, Audrey B. C.;Faas, Brigitte H.;van Langen, Irene M.;Lichtenbelt, Klaske D.;van Maarle, Merel C.;Macville, Merryn V. E.;Oepkes, Dick;Pajkrt, Eva;Henneman, Lidewij
为了评估高危孕妇的偏好和决策，提供了非侵入性产前检测(NIPT)、侵入性检测或不进一步检测的选择。全国实施研究(三叉戟)，提供NIPT作为应急筛查测试，对胎儿非整倍体风险增加的妇女，基于怀孕早期联合测试(>；1：200)或病史。咨询后完成问卷调查，根据知情选择多维度测量评估知识、态度和参与度。共有1091/1253名妇女(87%)完成了问卷调查。其中，1053例(96.5%)接受了NIPT，37例(3.4%)接受了侵入性检测，1例(0.1%)拒绝了检测。91.7%的人因为考试安全而选择NIPT。总体而言，77.9%的人做出了知情选择，89.8%的人对NIPT有足够的知识，90.5%的人对NIPT持积极态度。中等(优势比(OR) = 3.51[1.70-7.22]，p <； 0.001)或高学历(OR = 4.36[2.22-8.54]，p <； 0.001)和具有足够健康素养(OR = 2.60[1.36-4.95]，p = 0.004)的女性更有可能做出知情选择。知情的选择与较少的决策冲突和较少的焦虑相关(p <； 0.001)。在接受侵入性检测的女性中，唐氏综合症患者终止妊娠的意向(86.5%)高于接受非侵入性检测的女性(58.4%)(p <； 0.001)。大多数妇女都有足够的知识，并做出了明智的选择。需要持续关注咨询，特别是对受教育程度低和健康素养较低的妇女。©2016作者。产前诊断由John Wiley&Sons，Ltd.出版。NIPT作为侵入性检测的替代方案，用于筛查胎儿非整倍体的高危孕妇。尽管NIPT有许多优势，但人们对知情决策的后果表示担忧。关于这个话题，我们已经知道了些什么？在国家医疗保健资助的产前筛查计划中实施NIPT，并辅之以检测前咨询，结果使大多数女性拥有足够的知识并做出明智的选择。与选择侵入性检测的女性相比，接受NIPT的女性因唐氏综合症而终止妊娠的意向较低。这项研究补充了什么？
To evaluate preferences and decision‐making among high‐risk pregnant women offered a choice between Non‐Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT), invasive testing or no further testing. Nationwide implementation study (TRIDENT) offering NIPT as contingent screening test for women at increased risk for fetal aneuploidy based on first‐trimester combined testing (>1:200) or medical history. A questionnaire was completed after counseling assessing knowledge, attitudes and participation following the Multidimensional Measure of Informed Choice. A total of 1091/1253 (87%) women completed the questionnaire. Of these, 1053 (96.5%) underwent NIPT, 37 (3.4%) invasive testing and 1 (0.1%) declined testing. 91.7% preferred NIPT because of test safety. Overall, 77.9% made an informed choice, 89.8% had sufficient knowledge and 90.5% had positive attitudes towards NIPT. Women with intermediate (odds ratio (OR) = 3.51[1.70–7.22], p < 0.001) or high educational level (OR = 4.36[2.22–8.54], p < 0.001) and women with adequate health literacy (OR = 2.60[1.36–4.95], p = 0.004) were more likely to make an informed choice. Informed choice was associated with less decisional conflict and less anxiety (p < 0.001). Intention to terminate the pregnancy for Down syndrome was higher among women undergoing invasive testing (86.5%) compared to those undergoing NIPT (58.4%) (p < 0.001). The majority of women had sufficient knowledge and made an informed choice. Continuous attention for counseling is required, especially for low‐educated and less health‐literate women. © 2016 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. NIPT is offered as alternative to invasive testing to screen pregnant women at high risk for fetal aneuploidy. Although NIPT has many advantages, concerns have been raised about the consequences for informed decision‐making. What's already known about this topic? Implementation of NIPT in a national healthcare‐funded prenatal screening program, accompanied by pre‐test counseling, results in most women having sufficient knowledge and making an informed choice Compared to women choosing invasive testing, women undergoing NIPT have less intention to terminate the pregnancy for Down syndrome. What does this study adds?
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
120.7
作者：
Kuppermann, Miriam;Pena, Sherri;Norton, Mary E.
通讯作者：
Norton, Mary E.
DOI：
10.1111/j.1479-828x.2006.00630.x
发表时间：
2006-10-01
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Rowe, Heather J.;Fisher, Jane R. W.;Quinlivan, Julie A.
通讯作者：
Quinlivan, Julie A.
DOI：
10.2147/ijwh.s67124
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
International journal of women's health
影响因子：
--
作者：
Allyse M;Minear MA;Berson E;Sridhar S;Rote M;Hung A;Chandrasekharan S
通讯作者：
Chandrasekharan S
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Lewis, C.;Silcock, C.;Chitty, L. S.
通讯作者：
Chitty, L. S.
影响因子：
3
作者：
Tamminga, Saskia;van Schendel, Rachel V.;Henneman, Lidewij
通讯作者：
Henneman, Lidewij