How women deal with the results of serum screening for Down syndrome in the second trimester of pregnancy

Abstract

To gain insight into how pregnant women experience serum screening for Down syndrome, we sent questionnaires to two groups of relevant subjects in the north of the Netherlands. The questionnaires addressed the following issues: decision‐making process, knowledge and opinions. Questionnaire A was sent to women of 36 years of age and older (n=99) (group A) who were all 20 to 36 weeks pregnant at that time. In the Netherlands prenatal diagnosis is routinely available to these women. Questionnaire B was sent to women of younger than 36 years (n=69) (group B) who had received a screen‐positive result and had subsequently undergone amniocentesis. About half of these women were still pregnant at that time. For these women, serum screening is only available on the basis of opting‐in. The two questionnaires were largely identical. The response rates to questionnaires A and B were 82% and 91%, respectively. Group A (women of 36 years and older) considered that second trimester serum screening made a welcome contribution to the decision‐making process about whether to undergo amniocentesis. Moreover, it reduced the amniocentesis rate considerably. The vast majority said they would apply for serum screening in a following pregnancy, but favoured the idea of first trimester screening. In group B (women of younger than 36 years), reassurance was the most commonly mentioned reason for undergoing serum screening. Almost all the women experienced some degree of anxiety when they were informed about the screen‐positive result and 13% continued to be anxious, even after the favourable result of the amniocentesis. The majority of the respondents would also apply for serum screening in a following pregnancy and were of the opinion that this screening should be offered to all pregnant women in the Netherlands. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Psychosocial aspects of genetic screening of pregnant women and newborns: a systematic review

“…73 The two most commonly used validated measures of anxiety in applied health settings are the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 69 and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). 67,74 Twenty-four studies within the review measured anxiety, 12 employed the STAI, 12,17,[43][44][45]47,48,[75][76][77][78][79] one the STAI and HADS, 49 three used an unvalidated questionnaire measure 60,64,65 and ten ascertained anxiety levels by interview. 55,59,[80][81][82][83][84][85] Of these studies, nine assessed anxiety before women were tested 12,17,[43][44][45]47,48,76,77 and the rest after testing and/or after test results.…”

“…55,59,[80][81][82][83][84][85] Of these studies, nine assessed anxiety before women were tested 12,17,[43][44][45]47,48,76,77 and the rest after testing and/or after test results. Most studies were carried out in the UK, 12,17,[43][44][45]48,59,65,83,84 five in North America, 47,74,78,79,85 three in Finland, 55,80,82 two in The Netherlands 60,64 and one each in Denmark 81 and Italy. 77 As all studies in this chapter employing a validated measure of anxiety used the STAI, the STAI is discussed in more detail.…”

“…[49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65] The main research question of these studies varied, with few aiming to ascertain whether or not participants had received sufficient information prior to the offer of testing (Appendix 3 describes the research aims of included studies).…”

The attitude of women toward current and future possibilities of diagnostic testing in maternal blood using fetal DNA

“…The questionnaire was based on a questionnaire used in a previous study (Weinans et al, 2000). Data were analyzed by the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS/Windows).…”

Women as moral pioneers? Experiences of first trimester antenatal screening

“…A number of studies have found that many women continue to experience residual anxiety following a problematic screening result, even when diagnostic testing showed a 'normal' result (e.g., Baillie, Smith, Hewison, & Mason, 2000;Tymstra, 1986;Weinans et al, 2000). However, what is clear is that in the UK, with its recent policy move towards the routine offer of screening for fetal anomalies, particularly Down's syndrome, and the potential move to first trimester screening, with its generally higher uptake rate, many more women will be confronting these ethical dilemmas.…”