Do women prefer to have screening tests for Down syndrome that have the lowest screen-positive rate or the highest detection rate?

被引:23
作者
Mulvey, S
Zachariah, R
McIlwaine, K
Wallace, EM
机构
[1] Monash Univ, Monash Med Ctr, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Ctr Womens Hlth Res, Clayton, Vic 3168, Australia
[2] Monash Med Ctr, Womens & Childrens Program, Clayton, Vic, Australia
关键词
Down syndrome; screening preferences; detection rates; screen-positive rates;
D O I
10.1002/pd.701
中图分类号
Q3 [遗传学];
学科分类号
071007 ; 090102 ;
摘要
Objective To assess whether women have a preference for Down syndrome screening test performance. Methods A structured questionnaire exploring women's preferences for screening test performance was administered to women attending their first prenatal visit who wished to have Down syndrome screening performed. Results One hundred and twenty women were interviewed. The majority of women (n = 80) chose a screening test with a low screen-positive rate rather than the highest detection rate. The reasons given for this preference were a desire to minimise the risk of miscarriage of a normal baby and a belief that a detection rate of 80 to 90% was acceptable. However, older women (>37 years) chose a test with the highest detection rate possible, regardless of the higher screen-positive rate, preferring to miscarry a normal baby as a result of a diagnostic test rather than miss the detection of a baby with Down syndrome. Preferences were not influenced by previous screening experience. Conclusions Women express different preferences for screening test performance. Maternal age rather than previous screening experiences appears to be the major influence in these choices. Copyright (C) 2003 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:828 / 832
页数:5
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]   THE INFLUENCE OF SERUM SCREENING ON THE AMNIOCENTESIS RATE IN WOMEN OF ADVANCED MATERNAL AGE [J].
BEEKHUIS, JR ;
DEWOLF, BTHM ;
MANTINGH, A ;
HERINGA, MP .
PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 1994, 14 (03) :199-202
[2]   Screening for Down's syndrome: effects, safety, and cost effectiveness of first and second trimester strategies [J].
Gilbert, RE ;
Augood, C ;
Gupta, R ;
Ades, AE ;
Logan, S ;
Sculpher, M ;
van der Meulen, JHP .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2001, 323 (7310) :423-425
[3]   Preference assessment of prenatal diagnosis for Down syndrome: Is 35 years a rational cutoff? [J].
Grobman, WA ;
Dooley, SL ;
Welshman, EE ;
Pergament, E ;
Calhoun, EA .
PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 2002, 22 (13) :1195-1200
[4]   NEW ESTIMATES OF DOWN-SYNDROME RISKS AT CHORIONIC VILLUS SAMPLING, AMNIOCENTESIS, AND LIVEBIRTH IN WOMEN OF ADVANCED MATERNAL AGE FROM A UNIQUELY DEFINED POPULATION [J].
HALLIDAY, JL ;
WATSON, LF ;
LUMLEY, J ;
DANKS, DM ;
SHEFFIELD, LJ .
PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS, 1995, 15 (05) :455-465
[5]   CHROMOSOMAL ABNORMALITY RATES AT AMNIOCENTESIS AND IN LIVE-BORN INFANTS [J].
HOOK, EB ;
CROSS, PK ;
SCHREINEMACHERS, DM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1983, 249 (15) :2034-2038
[6]   Procedure-related miscarriages and Down syndrome-affected births: Implications for prenatal testing based on women's preferences [J].
Kuppermann, M ;
Nease, RF ;
Learman, LA ;
Gates, E ;
Blumberg, B ;
Washington, AE .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2000, 96 (04) :511-516
[7]  
Kuppermann M, 1999, PRENATAL DIAG, V19, P711, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0223(199908)19:8<711::AID-PD614>3.0.CO
[8]  
2-V
[9]  
Lam YH, 2000, PRENATAL DIAG, V20, P487
[10]  
Lam YH, 1998, PRENATAL DIAG, V18, P585, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0223(199806)18:6<585::AID-PD305>3.3.CO