Search

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., Key Points 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.

The aim of this study was to identify how physicians develop their knowledge base and practice patterns regarding noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT).A survey was used to assess physicians' informational sources and practice patterns regarding NIPT.While most of the 258 participants acquire knowledge about NIPT from the medical literature or didactic educational programming, 74 (28.7%) cite commercial laboratories as an initial source and 124 (47.8%) as a way to keep current with changes in NIPT. About one-third (n = 94, 36.4%) seek information about ethical issues related to NIPT. Half of the OB/GYN respondents (n = 136, 52.7%) provide pretest counseling; fewer refer to a genetic counselor or maternal fetal medicine specialist (MFM) (n = 94, 34.6%, n = 29, 11.2%, respectively). Pretest counseling content and the comfort with which participants discuss topics pertinent to patients' utilization of NIPT varied between OB/GYNs and MFMs.Advances in cff DNA technology emphasize the need for effective strategies for physicians to develop competency and practice patterns regarding NIPT. Study findings speak to the need for effective educational resources for obstetric providers, not just early adopters of NIPT but also for primary OB/GYNs as they serve in the role of the first point of contact for women considering their prenatal testing options. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Objective The aim of this study is to explore women's opinions about the use of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) to assess the risk of sex chromosome aneuploidies and microdeletion syndromes. Methods Focus groups were conducted with women who were currently pregnant or had recently delivered. Qualitative analysis using interpretive description was used to generate study findings. Results Thirty-one women (mean age 32.4 years) participated in the focus groups. Participants were unfamiliar with sex chromosome aneuploidies but expressed support for the use of NIPT to detect these conditions. Participants were uncertain about the utility and actionability of receiving information about microdeletion syndromes with variable or unknown phenotypic expression. Participants voiced their desire to be informed of all conditions assessed by NIPT prior to testing. They considered clinicians to be the key provider of such information, although stated that patients have a responsibility to be knowledgeable prior to testing in order to support informed decision making. Conclusions The use of NIPT to identify sex chromosome aneuploidies and microdeletion syndromes will introduce new challenges for clinicians to ensure pregnant women have the information and resources to make informed choices about NIPT when used for these conditions. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Objective Patients' use of the Internet as a source of health information is increasing. The objective of this study was to describe and evaluate Internet-based information about noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT), an important new genetic test currently available to high-risk women in early pregnancy. Methods Websites were sampled using leading search engines to mirror Internet-based search patterns of individuals seeking information about NIPT. Content analysis was conducted to assess website reading level, quality, and content. Results Basic information about NIPT use as a screening test was accurately described. Overall, sampled websites lacked balance and comprehensive information about NIPT and the complexity of decision making involved in electing for its use. All websites were written at reading levels higher than currently recommended levels for public health information. Conclusion While online resources should be used with reservation, they can be an important tool to support effective communication and patient-centered care. Online information can help both health care providers and pregnant patients who face a growing number of fetal genetic testing options. © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The aim of this study was to identify how physicians develop their knowledge base and practice patterns regarding noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT).A survey was used to assess physicians' informational sources and practice patterns regarding NIPT.While most of the 258 participants acquire knowledge about NIPT from the medical literature or didactic educational programming, 74 (28.7%) cite commercial laboratories as an initial source and 124 (47.8%) as a way to keep current with changes in NIPT. About one-third (n = 94, 36.4%) seek information about ethical issues related to NIPT. Half of the OB/GYN respondents (n = 136, 52.7%) provide pretest counseling; fewer refer to a genetic counselor or maternal fetal medicine specialist (MFM) (n = 94, 34.6%, n = 29, 11.2%, respectively). Pretest counseling content and the comfort with which participants discuss topics pertinent to patients' utilization of NIPT varied between OB/GYNs and MFMs.Advances in cff DNA technology emphasize the need for effective strategies for physicians to develop competency and practice patterns regarding NIPT. Study findings speak to the need for effective educational resources for obstetric providers, not just early adopters of NIPT but also for primary OB/GYNs as they serve in the role of the first point of contact for women considering their prenatal testing options. © 2016 John WileySons, Ltd.

The aim of this study is to explore women's opinions about the use of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) to assess the risk of sex chromosome aneuploidies and microdeletion syndromes.Focus groups were conducted with women who were currently pregnant or had recently delivered. Qualitative analysis using interpretive description was used to generate study findings.Thirty-one women (mean age 32.4 years) participated in the focus groups. Participants were unfamiliar with sex chromosome aneuploidies but expressed support for the use of NIPT to detect these conditions. Participants were uncertain about the utility and actionability of receiving information about microdeletion syndromes with variable or unknown phenotypic expression. Participants voiced their desire to be informed of all conditions assessed by NIPT prior to testing. They considered clinicians to be the key provider of such information, although stated that patients have a responsibility to be knowledgeable prior to testing in order to support informed decision making.The use of NIPT to identify sex chromosome aneuploidies and microdeletion syndromes will introduce new challenges for clinicians to ensure pregnant women have the information and resources to make informed choices about NIPT when used for these conditions.

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.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.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%).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.