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
. 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

Affiliations

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

Rachèl V van Schendel et al. J Genet Couns. 2017 Dec.

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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest

Lieve Page-Christiaens has been employed as an Associated Medical Director at Illumina Inc. since January, 2016. Dick Oepkes previously participated in clinical research sponsored by Ariosa Diagnostics and Natera Inc. All the other authors declare they have no conflict of interest.

Human Studies and Informed Consent

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all participants for being included in the study.

Animal Studies

No animal studies were carried out by the authors for this article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Women’s feelings towards the time waiting for NIPT results, N = 682
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
a Mean STAI scores at intake (Q1) and after receiving a normal NIPT test-result (Q2), N = 656. *Total STAI score (range 20–80). b Mean PRAQ-R scores at intake (Q1) and after receiving a normal NIPT test-result (Q2), N = 653. *Total PRAQ-R score calculated with subscale ‘child-related anxiety’ (range 4–20)

References

    1. ACMG American College of Medical Genetics statement on noninvasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy. Genetics in Medicine. 2013;15:395–398. doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.29. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Allyse M, Sayres LC, Goodspeed TA, Cho MK. Attitudes towards Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for aneuploidy among United States adults of reproductive age. Journal of Perinatology. 2014;34:429–434. doi: 10.1038/jp.2014.30. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bekker HL, Legare F, Stacey D, O’Connor A, Lemyre L. Is anxiety an appropriate measure of decision aid effectiveness: a systematic review. Patient Education and Counselling. 2003;50:255–262. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(03)00045-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brady P, Brison N, Van Den Bogaert K, de Ravel T, Peeters H, Van Esch H, et al. Clinical implementation of NIPT- technical and biological challenges. Clinical Genetics. 2016;89:523–530. doi: 10.1111/cge.12598. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Chetty S, Garabedian MJ, Norton ME. Uptake of noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in women following positive aneuploidy screening. Prenatal Diagnosis. 2013;33:542–546. doi: 10.1002/pd.4125. - DOI - PubMed