Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2009 Jan;113(1):53-63.
doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31818e7ec4.

Computerized prenatal genetic testing decision-assisting tool: a randomized controlled trial

Miriam Kuppermann  1 , Mary E Norton, Elena Gates, Steven E Gregorich, Lee A Learman, Sanae Nakagawa, Vickie A Feldstein, James Lewis, A Eugene Washington, Robert F Nease Jr
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Computerized prenatal genetic testing decision-assisting tool: a randomized controlled trial

Miriam Kuppermann et al. Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Jan.

Abstract

Objective: Guidelines for fetal aneuploidy testing recommend that screening and diagnostic testing be made available to pregnant women of all ages and that providers explain the differences between these tests to help their patients make informed testing decisions. We sought to estimate the effect of a computerized, interactive prenatal testing decision tool on prenatal testing decision making.

Methods: Four hundred ninety-six English- or Spanish-speaking women at 20 or fewer weeks of gestation were randomly assigned to view the interactive prenatal testing decision tool or the California Department of Health Services' educational booklet. Primary outcomes were knowledge, risk awareness, intervention satisfaction, decisional conflict, and among women aged at least 35 years, use of invasive diagnostic testing.

Results: Women assigned to the interactive prenatal testing decision tool had higher knowledge scores (79.5% compared with 64.9%, P<.001), were more likely to correctly estimate their risk of procedure-related miscarriage (64.9% compared with 48.1%, P=.002) and carrying a Down syndrome-affected fetus (63.5% compared with 15.1%, P<.001), were more satisfied with the intervention (P<.001), and had less decision uncertainty (P<.001) than controls after viewing the intervention. Most of these differences persisted over time. Among women aged at least 35 years, the interactive prenatal testing decision tool viewers who were originally less inclined to undergo invasive testing were ultimately more likely than similarly inclined controls to have amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (44.8% compared with 29.2%), whereas those who were originally more inclined to undergo an invasive procedure ultimately were less likely than similarly inclined controls to have a diagnostic procedure (84.6% compared with 94.9%; P=.015 for interaction).

Conclusion: Using an interactive prenatal testing decision tool results in more informed prenatal genetic testing decisions than viewing standard educational booklets.

Clinical trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00686062

Level of evidence: I.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Hook EB. Genetic counseling and prenatal cytogenic services: policy implications and detailed cost-benefit analyses of programs for the prevention of Down syndrome. In: Porter IH, Hook EB, editors. Service and education in medical genetics. New York (NY): Academic Press; 1979. p. 29–54.
    1. Penrose LS. The relative aetiological importance of birth order and maternal age in mongolism. Proc R Soc (London). Series B. 1934;115:431–50.
    1. ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 77: screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol 2007;109:217–27.
    1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 88, December 2007. Invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy. Obstet Gynecol 2007;110:1459–67.
    1. Woolf SH, Chan EC, Harris R, Sheridan SL, Braddock CH 3rd, Kaplan RM, et al. Promoting informed choice: transforming health care to dispense knowledge for decision making. Ann Intern Med 2005;143:293–300.

Publication types

Associated data