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
. 2023 Aug:287:130-136.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.06.009. Epub 2023 Jun 9.

Financial contribution as reason to opt out of non-invasive prenatal testing

Bo B Bet  1 , Lot Wielart  2 , Anita C J Ravelli  3 , Madelon van Wely  4 , Elisabeth van Leeuwen  5 , Eva Pajkrt  5
Affiliations
Free article

Financial contribution as reason to opt out of non-invasive prenatal testing

Bo B Bet et al. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2023 Aug.
Free article

Abstract

Objective: First trimester non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) provides pregnant women with a reliable, non-invasive method to screen for fetal aneuploidies. In the Netherlands, there is a nationwide prenatal screening program in which pregnant women and their partners are counseled about their options around 10 weeks of pregnancy. The first trimester and second trimester scan are fully reimbursed but the NIPT has an own financial contribution of €175 per participant, irrespective of type of insurance. The arguments for this own contribution are fear of uncritical use of NIPT or routinization. NIPT has a relatively stable uptake of 51%, against over 95% for second trimester anomaly scan. We aimed to explore the effect of this financial contribution on the decision to opt out of NIPT.

Study design: We performed a survey among 350 pregnant women undergoing a second trimester anomaly scan in our center, Amsterdam UMC, between January 2021 and April 2022. All pregnant women who declined NIPT in the first trimester, were asked to participate and answered 11-13 questions about the decision-making process, the reasons to opt out and the financial contribution.

Results: Information about NIPT was desired in 92% of women and 96% felt sufficiently informed. Most women took the decision not to perform NIPT with their partner and did not experience difficulties in taking this decision. The most important reason to decline NIPT was: "Every child is welcome" (69%). "The test was too expensive" was answered in 12% and was significantly correlated with lower maternal age. Additionally, one in five women (19%) said they would have done NIPT if it had been for free, which was significantly higher in younger women.

Conclusions: The own financial contribution plays a role in the decision-making to decline NIPT and partly explains the low uptake in the Netherlands. This suggests that there is no equal access to fetal aneuploidy screening. To overcome this inequality, this own contribution should be abandoned. We speculate that this will have a positive effect on the uptake, which will increase to at least 70% and potentially 94%.

Keywords: Decision-making; Financial contribution; Non-invasive prenatal testing; Prenatal screening; placental cell-free DNA.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

LinkOut - more resources