Women's interpretation of an abnormal result on measurement of fetal nuchal translucency and maternal serum screening for prenatal testing of Down syndrome
Article first published online: 14 AUG 2006
Copyright © 2006 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 28, Issue 3, pages 242–248, September 2006
How to Cite
Khoshnood, B., De Vigan, C., Blondel, B., Lhomme, A., Vodovar, V., Garel, M. and Goffinet, F. (2006), Women's interpretation of an abnormal result on measurement of fetal nuchal translucency and maternal serum screening for prenatal testing of Down syndrome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 28: 242–248. doi: 10.1002/uog.2845
- Issue published online: 14 AUG 2006
- Article first published online: 14 AUG 2006
- Manuscript Accepted: 7 MAR 2006
- This study was supported by the INSERM, CNRS, and MIRE-DREES program of Biomedical sciences, Health and Society (SHS-2002)for which we express our gratitude. Babak Khoshnood also received funding from a grant by the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale (FRM). We thank the staff of the Paris maternity units for their participation in the collection of data used for this analysis. The Paris Registry received financial support from INSERM (Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale), DGS (Direction Générale de la Santé) and InVS (Institut de Veille Sanitaire).
- Down syndrome;
- maternal serum screening;
- nuchal translucency;
- prenatal screening
To assess the effects of sociodemographic and health-provider factors on women's understanding of abnormal results on measurement of nuchal translucency (NT) and maternal serum screening (MSS), 18 months after the implementation of a policy aimed at increasing women's awareness regarding MSS.
A representative sample of women (n = 734) who gave birth in Parisian maternity units in 1999 were asked about their understanding of an abnormal result on MSS and NT. We assessed the effects of sociodemographic and health-provider factors on the probability of women interpreting an abnormal result correctly, misinterpreting it as a definitive diagnosis, or declaring that they did not know how to interpret the result. Response rate was 92% and the analyses included multinomial models.
For both MSS and NT measurement, the majority of women interpreted an abnormal result correctly. However, there were substantial sociodemographic differences in the probability of women interpreting an abnormal result correctly, and more so in the probability of their declaring not to know how to interpret the result. The probability of correct interpretations was substantially higher, and that of declaring not to know how to interpret the result substantially lower, for MSS than NT measurement. However, for several sociodemographic groups, the proportion of women who misinterpreted an abnormal result on screening as indicative of a definitive diagnosis was also higher for MSS as compared with NT measurement.
These findings underscore the need for additional efforts, along with alternative strategies, to inform women about the implications of prenatal screening, particularly in the case of measurement of NT. Copyright © 2006 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.