Patient-Centered Obstetric Care in the Age of Cell-Free Fetal DNA Prenatal Screening

Reducing decisional conflict in decisions about prenatal genetic testing: the impact of a dyadic intervention at the start of prenatal care

OBJECTIVES

Decisional conflict and regret about prenatal genetic screening and diagnostic tests may have important consequences in the current pregnancy and for future reproductive decisions. Identifying mechanisms that reduce conflict associated with the decision to use or decline these options is necessary for optimal patient counseling.

METHODS

We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a shared decision-making tool (NEST) at the beginning of prenatal care. Enrolled patients completed follow-up surveys at the time of testing (QTT) and in the second-third trimester (QFF), including the Decision Conflict Scale (DCS). Total DCS scores were analyzed using a multivariate linear mixed-effect model.

RESULTS

Of the total number of participants (n=502) enrolled, 449 completed the QTT and QFF surveys. The mean age of participants was 31.6±3.8, with most parous at the time of study participation (n=321; 71.7 %). Both the NEST (the intervention) and control groups had lower median total DCS scores at QFF (NEST 13.3 [1.7, 25.0] vs. control 16.7 [1.7, 25.0]; p=0.24) compared to QTT (NEST 20.8 [5.0, 25.0] vs. control 18.3 [3.3, 26.7]; p=0.89). Participants exposed to NEST had lower decisional conflict at QFF compared to control (β -3.889; [CI -7.341, -0.437]; p=0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

Using a shared decision-making tool at the start of prenatal care decreased decisional conflict regarding prenatal genetic testing. Such interventions have the potential to provide an important form of decision-making support for patients facing the unique type of complex and preference-based choices about the use of prenatal genetic tests.

Patient-Provider Satisfaction and Communication in U.S. Prenatal Care: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

This is a systematic review on patient-provider satisfaction in U.S. prenatal care by addressing the following research question: What factors influence patient-provider satisfaction during prenatal care?

METHODS

Thirty six online databases were searched for peer-reviewed research from February to September of 2018 using 10 key terms published in English on U.S. populations between the years 1993-2018 on the topic of provider communication skills and patient satisfaction in the prenatal context. Searches yielded 2563 articles. After duplicates were reviewed and eligibility determined, 32 articles met criteria and were included in the final content analysis. All reported study variables were entered into EXCEL, data reported in each study were analyzed by two people for inter-rater reliability and included in the qualitative content analysis. Two researchers also utilized assessment tools to assess the quality of the articles.

RESULTS

Results indicate the importance of good patient-provider communication, that patients have a need for more information on a plethora of topics, and that Hispanic and African American women reported less satisfaction.

DISCUSSION

We recommend that future studies measure potentially significant themes not adequately present in the reviewed studies such as practitioner demographics (e.g. gender, years of experience, or race/ethnicity), mothers under 18 years of age, inclusion of religious minorities, patients with differing immigration statuses, and patients with disabilities.

Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT): Reliability, Challenges, and Future Directions

Non-invasive prenatal testing was first discovered in 1988; it was primarily thought to be able to detect common aneuploidies, such as Patau syndrome (T13), Edward Syndrome (T18), and Down syndrome (T21). It comprises a simple technique involving the analysis of cell-free foetal DNA (cffDNA) obtained through maternal serum, using advances in next-generation sequencing. NIPT has shown promise as a simple and low-risk screening test, leading various governments and private organizations worldwide to dedicate significant resources towards its integration into national healthcare initiatives as well as the formation of consortia and research studies aimed at standardizing its implementation. This article aims to review the reliability of NIPT while discussing the current challenges prevalent among different communities worldwide.

Patient perspectives on noninvasive prenatal testing among black women in the United States: a scoping review

Advances in reproductive health technologies such as noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) are changing the landscape of prenatal care and maternal health. NIPT, made clinically available in the United States (US) in 2011, is a screening test that utilizes cell-free DNA (cfDNA) to detect for aneuploidies and genetic characteristics in fetal DNA. In September 2020, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommended NIPT for all pregnant patients regardless of age or risk factors. We examined peer-reviewed, empirical studies published from January 2011 to February 2022, assessing NIPT studies with patient perspectives in the US and what is known about how empirical studies include Black women. Our scoping review draws from PubMed (with advanced MeSH search options) and Scopus databases for advanced scoping review, with 33 articles meeting our criteria. Empirical studies on NIPT show patient perceptions range across five themes: 1) accuracy / safety, 2) return of results, 3) patient knowledge, 4) informed consent, and 5) perceptions among minoritized groups (with perceptions of race and gender as a social demographic intersection). Additionally, among the 15 studies that included that Black woman in their study sample, none measured the perceptions of Black women with genetic conditions. Bridging this knowledge gap is critical because NIPT is becoming increasingly accessible across the nation and is being developed to screen for additional genetic conditions, such as sickle cell disease. Ultimately, NIPT researchers need to go to greater lengths to examine the patient perspectives of Black women with and without genetic conditions.

Effectiveness of Interactive Digital Decision Aids in Prenatal Screening Decision-making: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Increasing prenatal screening options and limited consultation time have made it difficult for pregnant women to participate in shared decision-making. Interactive digital decision aids (IDDAs) could integrate interactive technology into health care to a facilitate higher-quality decision-making process.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of IDDAs on pregnant women's decision-making regarding prenatal screening.

METHODS

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Google Scholar, and reference lists of included studies until August 2021. We included the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the use of IDDAs (fulfilling basic criteria of International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration and these were interactive and digital) as an adjunct to standard care with standard care alone and involved pregnant women themselves in prenatal screening decision-making. Data on primary outcomes, that is, knowledge and decisional conflict, and secondary outcomes were extracted, and meta-analyses were conducted based on standardized mean differences (SMDs). Subgroup analysis based on knowledge was performed. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for risk-of-bias assessment.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs were identified from 10,283 references, of which 7 were included in quantitative synthesis. Analyses showed that IDDAs increased knowledge (SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.26-0.90) and decreased decisional conflict (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.05). Substantial heterogeneity in knowledge was identified, which could not be completely resolved through subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

IDDAs can improve certain aspects of decision-making in prenatal screening among pregnant women, but the results require cautious interpretation.

Risk Prediction Method of Obstetric Nursing Based on Data Mining

Obstetric nursing is not only complex but also prone to risks, which can have adverse effects on hospitals. Improper handling of existing risks in obstetric care can lead to enormous harm to patients and families. Therefore, it is necessary to pay attention to the risks of obstetric nursing, especially to predict the risks in a timely manner, and take effective measures to prevent them in time, so as to achieve the purpose of allowing patients to recover as soon as possible. Data mining has powerful forecasting function, so this paper proposes to combine the data-mining-based support vector machine method and XGBoost method into a forecasting model, which overcomes the shortcomings of unstable forecasting and low accuracy of a single forecasting model. The experimental results of this paper have shown that the prediction accuracy of the SVM-XGBoost combined prediction model has reached 100%, the accuracy of the single SVM prediction model is about 78%, and the accuracy of the single XGBoost prediction model is about 75%. Compared with the single SVM model and the XGBoost prediction model, the accuracy rate had increased by about 22% and 25%, and the precision rate and recall rate are also improved. Therefore, it is very suitable to use the SVM-XGBoost combined prediction model to predict the risk of obstetric nursing.

Patients' choices and opinions on chorionic villous sampling and non-invasive alternatives for prenatal testing following preimplantation genetic testing for hereditary disorders: A cross-sectional questionnaire study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate choices of and reasoning behind chorionic villous sampling and opinions on non-invasive prenatal testing among women and men achieving pregnancy following preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) for hereditary disorders.

METHODS

A questionnaire was electronically submitted to patients who had achieved a clinical pregnancy following PGT at the Center for Preimplantation Genetic Testing, Aalborg University Hospital, Denmark, between 2017 and 2020.

RESULTS

Chorionic villous sampling was declined by approximately half of the patients. The primary reason for declining was the perceived risk of miscarriage due to the procedure. Nine out of 10 patients responded that they would have opted for a non-invasive prenatal test if it had been offered. Some patients were not aware that the nuchal translucency scan offered to all pregnant women in the early second trimester only rarely provides information on the hereditary disorder for which PGT was performed.

CONCLUSION

Improved counseling on the array of prenatal tests and screenings available might be required to assist patients in making better informed decisions regarding prenatal testing. Non-invasive prenatal testing is welcomed by the patients and will likely increase the number of patients opting for confirmatory prenatal testing following PGT for hereditary disorders.

Decision-making for prenatal genetic screening: how will pregnant women navigate a growing number of aneuploidy and carrier screening options?

BACKGROUND

Prenatal genetic screens, including carrier screening (CS) and aneuploidy screening (AS), comprise an important component of reproductive healthcare delivery. Clinical practice guidelines emphasize the importance of informed decision-making and patient's preferences regarding the use of these screens. Yet, it is unclear how to achieve this ideal as prenatal genetic screening options rapidly become more complex and increasingly available to patients. With increased complexity and availability of reproductive testing options, decision-support strategies are critical to prepare patients to consider AS and/or CS.

METHODS

A self-administered survey evaluated knowledge and decision-making preferences for expanded carrier (CS) and aneuploidy (AS) prenatal screening. The survey was administered to participants before their first prenatal visit to assess baseline decision-making needs and preference at the initiation of prenatal care. Analysis was approached as a descriptive process.

RESULTS

Participants had similar familiarity with the concepts associated with AS compared to CS; mean knowledge scores for CS was 0.59 [possible range 0.00 to 1.00] and 0.55 for AS. Participants reported preferences to learn about a range of conditions, including those with severe or mild impact, childhood-onset, and adult-onset. Decision-making preference with respect to learning about the associated disease phenotypes for the contained on AS and CS panel shifted with the complexity of the panel, with a greater preference to learn about conditions post-test compared pre-test education as panels increased from 5 to 100 conditions.

CONCLUSION

Patients' baseline knowledge of prenatal genetic screens coupled with evolving decision-making preferences presents challenges for the delivery of prenatal genetic screens. This calls for the development and implementation of innovative approaches to support pregnant patients' decision-making commensurate with advances in prenatal genomics.

The Emergence and Global Spread of Noninvasive Prenatal Testing

Since its introduction in 2011, noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has spread rapidly around the world. It carries numerous benefits but also raises challenges, often related to sociocultural, legal, and economic contexts. This article describes the implementation of NIPT in nine countries, each with its own unique characteristics: Australia, Canada, China and Hong Kong, India, Israel, Lebanon, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Themes covered for each country include the structure of the healthcare system, how NIPT is offered, counseling needs and resources, and cultural and legal context regarding disability and pregnancytermination. Some common issues emerge, including cost as a barrier to equitable access, the complexity of decision-making about public funding, and a shortage of appropriate resources that promote informed choice. Conversely, sociocultural values that underlie the use of NIPT vary greatly among countries. The issues described will become even more challenging as NIPT evolves from a second-tier to a first-tier screening test with expanded use.

The impact of the emergence of COVID-19 on women's prenatal genetic testing decisions

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.

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.

Making the most of the first prenatal visit: The challenge of expanding prenatal genetic testing options and limited clinical encounter time

OBJECTIVE

Advances in prenatal genetics place additional challenges as patients must receive information about a growing array of screening and testing options. This raises concerns about how to achieve a shared decision-making process that prepares patients to make an informed decision about their choices about prenatal genetic screening and testing options, calling for a reconsideration of how healthcare providers approach the first prenatal visit.

METHODS

We conducted interviews with 40 pregnant women to identify components of decision-making regarding prenatal genetic screens and tests at this visit. Analysis was approached using grounded theory.

RESULTS

Participants brought distinct notions of risk to the visit, including skewed perceptions of baseline risk for a fetal genetic condition and the implications of screening and testing. Participants were very concerned about financial considerations associated with these options, ranking out-of-pocket costs on par with medical considerations. Participants noted diverging priorities at the first visit from those of their healthcare provider, leading to barriers to shared decision-making regarding screening and testing during this visit.

CONCLUSION

Research is needed to determine how to restructure the initiation of prenatal care in a way that best positions patients to make informed decisions about prenatal genetic screens and tests.

The personal utility of cfDNA screening: Pregnant patients' experiences with cfDNA screening and views on expanded cfDNA panels

Prenatal cell-free DNA screening (cfDNA) provides more genetic risk information about the fetus than has ever been possible. At the same time, the rapid expansion of new cfDNA panels raises important questions about how to structure patient-centered discussions that best support patients' decision-making about its use. To address this question, we conducted interviews with pregnant patients to identify decision-making needs and preferences with respect to cfDNA in patient-centered healthcare discussions, given its evolving capability to identify a range of fetal variants. Personal utility was a core concept guiding decision-making. Participants spoke of how their deeply personal values and beliefs about maternal responsibility, actionability, and tolerance of uncertainty framed their view of the personal utility of cfDNA screening. While discussing their notions of personal utility with their healthcare provider, participants also had concerns about potential ramifications for the provider-patient relationship and shared decision-making when disclosing values and preferences regarding disability, quality of life, and termination-particularly as it becomes possible to identify variants with different disease-associated severity and outcomes. The complexities associated with the introduction of genomics in prenatal care present unique challenges to structuring effective shared decision-making discussions between patients and their healthcare providers. While efforts are underway to determine how to best educate patients about the medical aspects of cfDNA, it is equally important to develop approaches in healthcare communication that enable patients to make informed, values-based decisions about the use of cfDNA and its impact on their pregnancy.

Perspectives of Pregnant People and Clinicians on Noninvasive Prenatal Testing: A Systematic Review and Qualitative Meta-synthesis

Background

Pregnant people have a risk of carrying a fetus affected by a chromosomal anomaly. Prenatal screening is offered to pregnant people to assess their risk. In recent years, noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been introduced clinically, which uses the presence of circulating cell-free fetal DNA in the maternal blood to quantify the risk of a chromosomal anomaly. At present, NIPT is publicly funded for pregnancies at high risk of a chromosomal anomaly, and available to pregnant people at average risk if they choose to pay out of pocket.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of primary, empirical qualitative research that describes the experiences and perspectives of pregnant people, their families, clinicians, and others with lived experience relevant to NIPT. We were interested in the beliefs, experiences, preferences, and perspectives of these groups. We analyzed the evidence available in 36 qualitative and mixed-methods studies using the integrative technique of qualitative meta-synthesis.

Results

Most people (pregnant people, clinicians, and others with relevant lived experience) said that NIPT offered important information to pregnant people and their partners. Most people were very enthusiastic about widening access to NIPT because it can provide information about chromosomal anomalies quite early in pregnancy, with relatively high accuracy, and without risk of procedure-related pregnancy loss. However, many groups cautioned that widening access to NIPT may result in routinization of this test, causing potential harm to pregnant people, their families, the health care system, people living with disabilities, and society as a whole. Widened logistical, financial, emotional, and informational access may be perceived as a benefit, but it can also confer harm on various groups. Many of these challenges echo historical critiques of other forms of prenatal testing, with some issues mitigated or exacerbated by the particular features of NIPT.

Conclusions

Noninvasive prenatal testing offers significant benefit for pregnant people but may also be associated with potential harms related to informed decision-making, inequitable use, social pressure to test, and reduced support for people with disabilities.

Facilitating informed choice about non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): a systematic review and qualitative meta-synthesis of women's experiences

Background

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) can be used to accurately detect fetal chromosomal anomalies early in pregnancy by assessing cell-free fetal DNA present in maternal blood. The rapid diffusion of NIPT, as well as the ease and simplicity of the test raises concerns around informed decision-making and the potential for routinization. Introducing NIPT in a way that facilitates informed and autonomous decisions is imperative to the ethical application of this technology. We approach this imperative by systematically reviewing and synthesizing primary qualitative research on women’s experiences with and preferences for informed decision-making around NIPT.

Methods

We searched multiple bibliographic databases including Ovid MEDLINE, EBSCO Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and ISI Web of Science Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI). Our review was guided by integrative qualitative meta-synthesis, and we used a staged coding process similar to that of grounded theory to conduct our analysis.

Results

Thirty empirical primary qualitative research studies were eligible for inclusion. Women preferred to learn about NIPT from their clinicians, but they expressed dissatisfaction with the quality and quantity of information provided during counselling and often sought information from a variety of other sources. Women generally had a good understanding of test characteristics, and the factors of accuracy, physical risk, and test timing were the critical information elements that they used to make informed decisions around NIPT. Women often described NIPT as easy or just another blood test, highlighting threats to informed decision-making such as routinization or a pressure to test.

Conclusions

Women’s unique circumstances modulate the information that they value and require most in the context of making an informed decision. Widened availability of trustworthy information about NIPT as well as careful attention to the facilitation of counselling may help facilitate informed decision-making.

Trial registration

PROSPERO 2018 CRD42018086261.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-018-2168-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Renal genetics in Australia: Kidney medicine in the genomic age

There have been few new therapies for patients with chronic kidney disease in the last decade. However, the management of patients affected by genetic kidney disease is rapidly evolving. Inherited or genetic kidney disease affects around 10% of adults with end‐stage kidney disease and up to 70% of children with early onset kidney disease. Advances in next‐generation sequencing have enabled rapid and cost‐effective sequencing of large amounts of DNA. Next‐generation sequencing‐based diagnostic tests now enable identification of a monogenic cause in around 20% of patients with early‐onset chronic kidney disease. A definitive diagnosis through genomic testing may negate the need for prolonged diagnostic investigations and surveillance, facilitate reproductive planning and provide accurate counselling for at‐risk relatives. Genomics has allowed the better understanding of disease pathogenesis, providing prognostic information and facilitating development of targeted treatments for patients with inherited or genetic kidney disease. Although genomic testing is becoming more readily available, there are many challenges to implementation in clinical practice. Multidisciplinary renal genetics clinics serve as a model of how some of these challenges may be overcome. Such clinics are already well established in most parts of Australia, with more to follow in future. With the rapid pace of new technology and gene discovery, collaboration between expert clinicians, laboratory and research scientists is of increasing importance to maximize benefits to patients and health‐care systems.

The authors reckoned the importance of genomic testing as it allows better understanding of disease pathogenesis, provides prognostic information and facilitates development of targeted treatment, particularly for patients with inherited or genetic kidney disease.