Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Genet Couns. 2017 Dec;26(6):1348-1356. doi: 10.1007/s10897-017-0118-3. Epub 2017 Jun 30.

Women's Experience with Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing and Emotional Well-being and Satisfaction after Test-Results.

Author information

1
Department of Clinical Genetics, Section Community Genetics and Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
2
Department Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
3
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
4
Fetal Medicine Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
5
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
6
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Maastricht UMC +, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
7
Department of Human Genetics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
8
Department of Genetics, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
9
Department of Medical Genetics, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
10
Department of Clinical Genetics, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
11
Department of Clinical Genetics, Maastricht UMC +, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
12
Department of Obstetrics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
13
Fetal Medicine Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
14
Department of Clinical Genetics, Section Community Genetics and Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. l.henneman@vumc.nl.

Abstract

Increasingly, high-risk pregnant women opt for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) instead of invasive diagnostic testing. Since NIPT is less accurate than invasive testing, a normal NIPT result might leave women less reassured. A questionnaire study was performed among pregnant women with elevated risk for fetal aneuploidy based on first-trimester combined test (risk ≥1:200) or medical history, who were offered NIPT in the nationwide Dutch TRIDENT study. Pre- and post-test questionnaires (n = 682) included measures on: experiences with NIPT procedure, feelings of reassurance, anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI), child-related anxiety (PRAQ-R), and satisfaction. The majority (96.1%) were glad to have been offered NIPT. Most (68.5%) perceived the waiting time for NIPT results (mean: 15 days, range 5-32) as (much) too long. Most women with a normal NIPT result felt reassured (80.9%) or somewhat reassured (15.7%). Levels of anxiety and child-related anxiety were significantly lower after receiving a normal NIPT result as compared to the moment of intake (p < 0.001). Women with inadequate health literacy or a medical history (e.g. previous child with trisomy) experienced significantly higher post-test-result anxiety (Mean (M) STAI = 31.6 and 30.0, respectively) compared to those with adequate health literacy (M = 28.6) and no medical history (M = 28.6), indicating these women might benefit from extra information and/or guidance when communicating NIPT test-results. Introducing NIPT as an alternative to invasive testing, led to an offer that satisfied and largely reassured high-risk pregnant women.

KEYWORDS:

Anxiety; NIPT; Non-invasive Prenatal Testing; Prenatal Screening; Reassurance; Satisfaction

PMID:
28667567
PMCID:
PMC5672853
DOI:
10.1007/s10897-017-0118-3
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center