Kimberly Foil, Lillian Christon, Cheryl Kerrigan, Patrick A Flume, Jaclyn Drinkwater, Sylvia Szentpetery
{"title":"Experiences of cystic fibrosis newborn screening and genetic counseling.","authors":"Kimberly Foil, Lillian Christon, Cheryl Kerrigan, Patrick A Flume, Jaclyn Drinkwater, Sylvia Szentpetery","doi":"10.1007/s12687-023-00666-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The South Carolina cystic fibrosis (CF) newborn screening (NBS) program changed in 2019 to include CFTR genotyping for babies with top 4% immunoreactive trypsinogen, which improves sensitivity and timeliness but increases carrier detection. Carrier identification has genetic implications for the family and parents of NBS+ babies have increased emotional distress. Genetic counseling (GC) may increase parent understanding and reduce anxiety yet is not uniformly offered at CF centers. We report our early results after implementing GC for NBS+ families at the time of sweat chloride testing based on GC availability, which resulted in an unselected GC- control arm. Sixteen mothers (GC+ = 9, GC- = 7) participated in an online survey about their experience. Responses were analyzed in aggregate and for differences between GC+ and GC- groups. All-respondent sadness and anxiety increased with notification of the NBS+ result and decreased after sweat test results. Anxiety and sadness were greater in GC- compared to GC+ until after the diagnosis was resolved, though emotional differences between the groups were not statistically significant. On a scale of 0 = not at all to 10 = extremely, GC was rated very helpful (mean 9.0, range 5-10), informative (mean 8.9, range 4-10), comforting (mean 9.1, range 6-10), and minimally distracting (mean 1.8, range 0-9). All participants correctly identified that a risk for a child to have CF exists when both parents are (at least) carriers. Delivery of NBS results to respondents varied by timing, informant, and information given. The child's pediatrician notified 10 (62.5%) of the NBS+ result. Parents felt they were notified in a timely manner (68.8%), by someone knowledgeable about NBS (62.5%), the sweat test (62.5%), CF (43.8%), and genetics (43.8%) and who cared about them (81.3%). Parents felt worried (81.3%), confused (81.3%), empowered (25%), and other (sad, shocked, scared, overwhelmed, devastated, defeated). Data from this single-center study suggest benefit of GC, that families would value earlier contact with an expert, and that prompt diagnostic resolution may reduce duration of parental distress.</p>","PeriodicalId":46965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Genetics","volume":" ","pages":"621-626"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10725400/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687-023-00666-8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The South Carolina cystic fibrosis (CF) newborn screening (NBS) program changed in 2019 to include CFTR genotyping for babies with top 4% immunoreactive trypsinogen, which improves sensitivity and timeliness but increases carrier detection. Carrier identification has genetic implications for the family and parents of NBS+ babies have increased emotional distress. Genetic counseling (GC) may increase parent understanding and reduce anxiety yet is not uniformly offered at CF centers. We report our early results after implementing GC for NBS+ families at the time of sweat chloride testing based on GC availability, which resulted in an unselected GC- control arm. Sixteen mothers (GC+ = 9, GC- = 7) participated in an online survey about their experience. Responses were analyzed in aggregate and for differences between GC+ and GC- groups. All-respondent sadness and anxiety increased with notification of the NBS+ result and decreased after sweat test results. Anxiety and sadness were greater in GC- compared to GC+ until after the diagnosis was resolved, though emotional differences between the groups were not statistically significant. On a scale of 0 = not at all to 10 = extremely, GC was rated very helpful (mean 9.0, range 5-10), informative (mean 8.9, range 4-10), comforting (mean 9.1, range 6-10), and minimally distracting (mean 1.8, range 0-9). All participants correctly identified that a risk for a child to have CF exists when both parents are (at least) carriers. Delivery of NBS results to respondents varied by timing, informant, and information given. The child's pediatrician notified 10 (62.5%) of the NBS+ result. Parents felt they were notified in a timely manner (68.8%), by someone knowledgeable about NBS (62.5%), the sweat test (62.5%), CF (43.8%), and genetics (43.8%) and who cared about them (81.3%). Parents felt worried (81.3%), confused (81.3%), empowered (25%), and other (sad, shocked, scared, overwhelmed, devastated, defeated). Data from this single-center study suggest benefit of GC, that families would value earlier contact with an expert, and that prompt diagnostic resolution may reduce duration of parental distress.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Community Genetics is an international forum for research in the ever-expanding field of community genetics, the art and science of applying medical genetics to human communities for the benefit of their individuals.
Community genetics comprises all activities which identify persons at increased genetic risk and has an interest in assessing this risk, in order to enable those at risk to make informed decisions. Community genetics services thus encompass such activities as genetic screening, registration of genetic conditions in the population, routine preconceptional and prenatal genetic consultations, public education on genetic issues, and public debate on related ethical issues.
The Journal of Community Genetics has a multidisciplinary scope. It covers medical genetics, epidemiology, genetics in primary care, public health aspects of genetics, and ethical, legal, social and economic issues. Its intention is to serve as a forum for community genetics worldwide, with a focus on low- and middle-income countries.
The journal features original research papers, reviews, short communications, program reports, news, and correspondence. Program reports describe illustrative projects in the field of community genetics, e.g., design and progress of an educational program or the protocol and achievement of a gene bank. Case reports describing individual patients are not accepted.