Public Perspectives Around Prenatal Screening of Chromosomal Abnormalities: A Focus Group Study Comparing Metropolitan and Rural/Regional Areas in Australia.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology Pub Date : 2025-02-07 DOI:10.1111/ajo.13935
Amber Salisbury, Hovea Winston, Alexis Johnson, Alison Pearce, Kirsten Howard, Sarah Norris
{"title":"Public Perspectives Around Prenatal Screening of Chromosomal Abnormalities: A Focus Group Study Comparing Metropolitan and Rural/Regional Areas in Australia.","authors":"Amber Salisbury, Hovea Winston, Alexis Johnson, Alison Pearce, Kirsten Howard, Sarah Norris","doi":"10.1111/ajo.13935","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The widespread and rapid adoption of private payments for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in Australia has introduced complexities to the decision-making process for the public regarding prenatal screening. NIPT has the potential to be a useful screening tool, but concerns have been raised about its cost, the psychological consequences of testing and the information available to support informed decision-making.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the attitudes, values and beliefs around prenatal screening in Australia, and how perspectives may differ between people living in metropolitan locations versus rural/regional locations.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Three focus groups were conducted in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Participants (N = 25) were recruited by a market research group. Focus groups took place face-to-face in metropolitan and rural/regional areas, and online via videoconference. Discussions were transcribed and analysed thematically.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants generally expressed interest in undertaking prenatal screening but held misconceptions about the purpose of NIPT (i.e. screening, not diagnosis) and the conditions assessed. There were varied opinions among participants on expanding the scope of screening: some felt additional information provided reassurance, whilst others thought it would increase stress due to the decreased accuracy. People living in rural/regional areas had greater concerns over access to screening (cost, wait times and distance) than people living in metropolitan areas.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings demonstrate different approaches are needed to improve understanding of NIPT (to ensure informed consent), and to improve access to NIPT for people living in rural/regional areas. The pre-test information needs to account for the range of perspectives observed across geographic locations.</p>","PeriodicalId":55429,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13935","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The widespread and rapid adoption of private payments for non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in Australia has introduced complexities to the decision-making process for the public regarding prenatal screening. NIPT has the potential to be a useful screening tool, but concerns have been raised about its cost, the psychological consequences of testing and the information available to support informed decision-making.

Objective: To explore the attitudes, values and beliefs around prenatal screening in Australia, and how perspectives may differ between people living in metropolitan locations versus rural/regional locations.

Materials and methods: Three focus groups were conducted in New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Participants (N = 25) were recruited by a market research group. Focus groups took place face-to-face in metropolitan and rural/regional areas, and online via videoconference. Discussions were transcribed and analysed thematically.

Results: Participants generally expressed interest in undertaking prenatal screening but held misconceptions about the purpose of NIPT (i.e. screening, not diagnosis) and the conditions assessed. There were varied opinions among participants on expanding the scope of screening: some felt additional information provided reassurance, whilst others thought it would increase stress due to the decreased accuracy. People living in rural/regional areas had greater concerns over access to screening (cost, wait times and distance) than people living in metropolitan areas.

Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate different approaches are needed to improve understanding of NIPT (to ensure informed consent), and to improve access to NIPT for people living in rural/regional areas. The pre-test information needs to account for the range of perspectives observed across geographic locations.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
165
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ANZJOG) is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) and the RANZCOG Research foundation. ANZJOG aims to provide a medium for the publication of original contributions to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of obstetrics and gynaecology and related disciplines. Articles are peer reviewed by clinicians or researchers expert in the field of the submitted work. From time to time the journal will also publish printed abstracts from the RANZCOG Annual Scientific Meeting and meetings of relevant special interest groups, where the accepted abstracts have undergone the journals peer review acceptance process.
期刊最新文献
Changing Trends in the Surgical Management of Stress Urinary Incontinence in Australia. Participation in the National Cervical Screening Program Among Women Who Gave Birth in New South Wales, Australia by Place of Maternal Birth: A Data Linkage Analysis. Rethinking Experiences of Birth in Our Operating Theatre (REBOOT): A Qualitative Study of Patient and Staff Experiences of Birth in the Operating Theatre. ACCEPT Group Condensed Position Paper on the Management of Recurrent Pregnancy Loss. In Suspected Fetal Growth Restriction, sFlt-1/PlGF and PlGF May Have Value in Risk Stratification for Preterm Birth and Birthweight < 3rd Centile: A Blinded Cohort Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1