Patient experiences with prenatal cell-free DNA screening in a safety net setting
- PMID: 38423995
- PMCID: PMC11027152
- DOI: 10.1002/pd.6541
Patient experiences with prenatal cell-free DNA screening in a safety net setting
Abstract
Objectives: Thirty-five states, including Florida, now cover cell-free DNA (cfDNA) screening of fetuses for all pregnant patients enrolled in state public insurance programs. We interviewed Black and Hispanic obstetric patients at a safety net clinic in Florida shortly after the state rolled out cfDNA as a first-tier screening method for publicly insured patients.
Methods: Black and Hispanic patients receiving prenatal care from a prenatal or maternal fetal medicine clinic at a federally qualified health center in Jacksonville, FL were invited to participate in a qualitative interview in English or Spanish to explore experiences and perceptions of prenatal cfDNA screening. Participants were recruited following their first prenatal visit when cfDNA is typically introduced. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed for iterative themes based on principles of grounded theory.
Results: One hundred Black and Hispanic patients (n = 51 non-Hispanic Black, n = 43 Hispanic, n = 3 Hispanic Black, n = 3 Not Reported/Other) completed an interview. Participants described minimal opportunity for pre-screening counseling and limited health literacy about cfDNA or its uses. Some believed that cfDNA could positively impact pregnancy health. Many were unsure if they had received cfDNA even though they were aware of the information provided by it. Most participants expressed an interest in cfDNA as a means for early detection of fetal sex and as an additional indication of general fetal health.
Conclusions: Patient experiences indicate limited informed consent and decision-making for cfDNA, discordant with professional guidelines on pre-screen counseling. Our findings suggest that there should be additional investment in implementing cfDNA in safety net settings to ensure that patients and providers receive the support necessary for effective patient counseling and follow-on care for the ethical implementation of cfDNA.
© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Conflict of interest statement
Similar articles
-
"I think we've got too many tests!": Prenatal providers' reflections on ethical and clinical challenges in the practice integration of cell-free DNA screening.Ethics Med Public Health. 2016 Jul-Sep;2(3):334-342. doi: 10.1016/j.jemep.2016.07.006. Ethics Med Public Health. 2016. PMID: 28180146 Free PMC article.
-
Unusual Maternal and Fetal Findings With Cell-Free DNA Screening.Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2024 Sep;79(9):539-546. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0000000000001297. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2024. PMID: 39288158 Review.
-
The personal utility of cfDNA screening: Pregnant patients' experiences with cfDNA screening and views on expanded cfDNA panels.J Genet Couns. 2020 Feb;29(1):88-96. doi: 10.1002/jgc4.1183. Epub 2019 Nov 3. J Genet Couns. 2020. PMID: 31680382
-
Spanish- and English-Speaking Pregnant Women's Views on cfDNA and Other Prenatal Screening: Practical and Ethical Reflections.J Genet Couns. 2016 Oct;25(5):965-77. doi: 10.1007/s10897-015-9928-3. Epub 2016 Jan 7. J Genet Couns. 2016. PMID: 26739840 Free PMC article.
-
Advances in Prenatal Cell-Free DNA Screening for Dominant Monogenic Conditions: A Review of Current Progress and Future Directions in Clinical Implementation.Prenat Diagn. 2025 Apr;45(4):445-452. doi: 10.1002/pd.6752. Epub 2025 Jan 25. Prenat Diagn. 2025. PMID: 39865331 Review.
Cited by
-
Rethinking the Burden of Traditional Informed Consent Prior to Prenatal Genetic Screening.Hastings Cent Rep. 2025 Mar;55(2):29-38. doi: 10.1002/hast.4976. Hastings Cent Rep. 2025. PMID: 40245273
References
-
- Dungan JS, Klugman S, Darilek S et al. Noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) for fetal chromosome abnormalities in a general-risk population: An evidence-based clinical guideline of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG). Genet Med. 2023;25:100336. - PubMed
-
- American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Practice Bulletin - Obstetrics, Committee on Genetics, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine. Screening for Fetal Chromosomal Abnormalities: ACOG Practice Bulletin, Number 226. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;136:e48–e69. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources