Informed consent is the process by which the treating health care provider discloses appropriate information to a competent patient so that the patient may make a voluntary choice to accept or refuse treatment. When the analysis of circulating cell free DNA (ccfDNA) became commercially available in 2011 through the Prenatal Diagnostic Laboratory at Women & Infants Hospital of Providence, Rhode Island to "high-risk" women, it provided an opportunity to examine how commercial laboratories informed potential consumers. We identified, via an internet search, four laboratories offering such testing in the United States and one in Europe. We evaluated patient educational materials (PEMs) from each using the Flesch Reading Ease method and a modified version of the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) criteria. Pamphlets were also reviewed for their inclusion of content recommendations from the International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis, the National Society of Genetic Counselors, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists jointly with the Society of Maternal Fetal Medicine, and the American College of Genetics and Genomics. Reading levels were typically high (10th-12th grade). None of the pamphlets met all SAM criteria evaluated nor did any pamphlet include all recommended content items. To comply with readability and content recommendations more closely, Women & Infants Hospital created a new pamphlet to which it applied the same criteria, and also subjected it to focus group assessment. These types of analyses can serve as a model for future evaluations of similar patient educational materials.

Once adequate facilities for patient and provider education, testing, counseling, quality control, and monitoring are in place, individual programs can begin prenatal screening for cystic fibrosis.

DNA (and other) diagnostic tests are now available for a number of serious, but uncommon, fetal disorders. We designed and evaluated a screening system for this purpose in primary care, coupled with targeted information for practitioners and patients. We developed a 15-question family history form for completion by office staff or patients, addressing conditions for which definitive diagnosis was available, linked to secondary questionnaires to follow up on "yes" answers. Guidelines for assessing risk, follow-up recommendations, and information resources were also linked. Following pilot testing, this screening system was introduced throughout Maine. We enrolled 212 providers (85-90% of the state's pregnancies). In a subsequent survey, 85% of the practices were screening all new patients and 3% some; 12% did not use the system. Time for form completion averaged 7 min. Overall, provider satisfaction was 4.4 on a five-point scale. Patients responded favorably; a minority was anxious or overwhelmed. Total referral calls to Maine's genetic/perinatal centers did not increase, but calls about family history of genetic disorders or maternal conditions increased significantly. This screening system for guiding appropriate use of DNA (and other) testing in pregnancy can be used successfully in primary care.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

No abstract