Comparison of the use of amniocentesis in two countries with different policies for prenatal testing: The case of France and the United States

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 14-19

  Khoshnood, Babak ^a   Blondel, Béatrice ^a   Bréart, Gérard ^a   Lee, Kwang Sun ^b,c   Pryde, Peter ^d   Schoendorf, Kenneth ^e  

^a INSERM   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^e NATIONAL CENTER FOR HEALTH STATISTICS   (United States)

Author keywords

Amniocentesis; France; Maternal education; Prenatal diagnosis; United States

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AMNIOCENTESIS; ARTICLE; EDUCATION; FEMALE; FRANCE; HUMAN; MATERNAL AGE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SOCIOECONOMICS; UNITED STATES;

AMNIOCENTESIS; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; FRANCE; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; MATERNAL AGE; PREGNANCY; SOCIAL CLASS; UNITED STATES;

TRIXIS;

EID: 13244267317     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.1075     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. ACOG Practice Bulletin. Clinical Management Guidelines for Obstetrician-Gynecologists. 2001. Prenatal diagnosis of fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol 97(5 Pt 1): 1-12.
2. Aetna Clinical Policy Bulletin Number 0282. August 29, 2003. http://www.aetna.com/cpb/data/CPBA0282.html (Consulted September 22, 2004).
3. Asch A. 1999. Prenatal diagnosis and selective abortion: a challenge to practice and policy. Am J Public Health 89(11): 1649-1657.
4. Ayme S, Morichon N, Goujard J, Nisand I. 1997. Prenatal diagnosis in France. Eur J Hum Genet 5: (suppl 1): 26-31.
5. Bishop J, Huether CA, Torfs C, Lorey F, Deddens J. 1997. Epidemiologic study of Down syndrome in a racially diverse California population, 1989-1991. Am J Epidemiol 145(2): 134-147.
6. Blondel B, Norton J, du Mazaubrun C, Bréart G. 2001. pour la coordination nationale des enquétes nationales périnatales. Trends in main indicators of perinatal health in France between 1995 and 1998. Results from the national perinatal surveys. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 30: 552-564.
7. Buescher PA, Taylor KP, Davis MH, Bowling JM. 1993. The quality of the new birth certificate data: a validation study in North Carolina. Am J Public Health 83(8): 1163-1165.
8. Clayton EW. 1999. What should be the role of public health in newborn screening and prenatal diagnosis? Am J Prev Med 16(2): 111-115.
9. Cunningham GC, Tompkinison DG. 1999. Cost and effectiveness of the California triple marker prenatal screening program. Genet Med 1(5): 199-206.
10. De Graaf IM, Tijmstra T, Bleker OP, Van Lith JM. 2002. Womens' preference in Down syndrome screening. Prenat Diagn 22(7): 624-629.
11. De Vigan C, Vodovar V, Verite V, Dehe S, Goujard J. 1999. Current French practices for prenatal diagnosis of trisomy 21: a population-based study in Paris, 1992-1997. Prenat Diagn 19(12): 1113-1118.
12. Decree of September 1997 (completed by the decree of February 11th 1999), Journal Officiel de la République Française (1997).
13. Egan JF, Benn P, Borgida AF, Rodis JF, Campbell WA, Vintzileos AM. 2000. Efficacy of screening for fetal Down syndrome in the United States from 1974 to 1997. Obstet Gynecol 96(6): 979-985.
14. Haddow JE, Palomaki GE, Knight GJ, Cunningham GC, Lustig LS, Boyd PA. 1994. Reducing the need for amniocentesis in women 35 years of age or older with serum markers for screening. N Engl J Med 330(16): 1114-1118.
15. Harris RA, Washington AE, Feeny D, Kuppermann M. 2001. Decision analysis of prenatal testing for chromosomal disorders: what do the preferences of pregnant women tell us? Genet Test 5(1): 23-32.
16. Heckerling PS, Verp MS, Hadro TA. 1994. Preferences of pregnant women for amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling for prenatal testing: comparison of patients' choices and those of a decision-analytic model. J Clin Epidemiol 47(11): 1215-1228.
17. Holtzman NA, Shapiro D. 1998. Genetic testing and public policy. BMJ 316(7134): 852-856.
18. Julian-Reynier C, Macquart-Moulin G, Moatti JP, Aurran Y, Chabal F, Ayme S. 1994. Reasons for women's non-uptake of amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn 14(9): 859-864.
19. Khoshnood B, Blondel B, De Vigan C, Bréart G. 2003. Effects of maternal age and education on the pattern of prenatal testing: implications for the use of antenatal screening as a solution to the growing number of amniocenteses. Am J Obstet Gynecol 189(5): 1336-1342.
20. Khoshnood B, Blondel B, De Vigan C, Breart G. 2004. Socioeconomic barriers to informed decisionmaking regarding maternal serum screening for down syndrome: results of the French National Perinatal Survey of 1998. Am J Public Health 94(3): 484-491.
21. Khoshnood B, De Vigan C, Vodovar V, Goujard J, Goffinet F. 2004. A population-based evaluation of the impact of antenatal screening for Down's syndrome in France, 1981-2000. BJOG 111(5): 485-490.
22. Khoshnood B, Pryde P, Wall S, Singh J, Mittendorf R, Lee KS. 2000. Ethnic differences in the impact of advanced maternal age on birth prevalence of Down syndrome. Am J Public Health 90(11): 1778-1781.
23. Kinmonth AL, Reinhard J, Bobrow M, Pauker S. 1998. The new genetics. Implications for clinical services in Britain and the United States. BMJ 316(7133): 767-770.
24. Kuppermann M, Feeny D, Gates E, Posner SF, Blumberg B, Washington AE. 1999. Preferences of women facing a prenatal diagnostic choice: long-term outcomes matter most. Prenat Diagn 19(8): 711-716.
25. Kuppermann M, Gates E, Washington AE. 1996. Racial-ethnic differences in prenatal diagnostic test use and outcomes: preferences, socioeconomics, or patient knowledge? Obstet Gynecol 87(5 Pt 1): 675-682.
26. Kuppermann M, Goldberg JD, Nease RF Jr., Washington AE. 1999. Who should be offered prenatal diagnosis?. The 35-year-old question. Am J Public Health 89(2): 160-163.
27. Kuppermann M, Nease RF, Learman LA, Gates E, Blumberg B, Washington AE. 2000. Procedure-related miscarriages and Down syndrome-affected births: implications for prenatal testing based on women's preferences. Obstet Gynecol 96(4): 511-516.
28. Malone FD, Berkowitz RL, Canick JA, D'Alton ME. 2000. First-trimester screening for aneuploidy: research or standard of care? Am J Obstet Gynecol 182(3): 490-496.
29. Marteau TM, Drake H. 1995. Attributions for disability: the influence of genetic screening. Soc Sci Med 40(8): 1127-1132.
30. Martin JA, Hamilton BE, Ventura SJ, Menacker F, Park MM, Sutton PD. 2002. Births: Final Data for 2001. Report No. National Vital Statistics Reports; Vol 51 no.2. National Center for Health Statistics: Hyattsville, MD.
31. Moatti JP, Le Gales C, Julian C, Durbec JP, Mattei JF, Ayme S. 1990. Socio-cultural inequities in access to prenatal diagnosis: the role of insurance coverage and regulatory policies. Prenat Diagn 10(5): 313-325.
32. National Center for Health Statistics. 1999. Public Use Data File Documentation: 1997 Period Linked birth/Infant Death Data Set. Hyattsville, MD.
33. Olsen CL, Cross PK. 1997. Trends in the use of prenatal diagnosis in New York State and the impact of biochemical screening on the detection of Down syndrome: 1984-1993. Prenat Diagn 17(12): 1113-1124.
34. Parrish KM, Holt VL, Connell FA, Williams B, LoGerfo JP. 1993. Variations in the accuracy of obstetric procedures and diagnoses on birth records in Washington State, 1989. Am J Epidemiol 138(2): 119-127.
35. Piper JM, Mitchel EFJr, Snowden M, Hall C, Adams M, Taylor P. 1993. Validation of 1989 Tennessee birth certificates using maternal and newborn hospital records. Am J Epidemiol 137(7): 758-768.
36. Robbins AS, Chao SY, Fonseca VP. 2002. What's the relative risk? A method to directly estimate risk ratios in cohort studies of common outcomes. Ann Epidemiol 12(7): 452-454.
37. Rodwin VG. 2003. The health care system under French national health insurance: lessons for health reform in the United States. Am J Public Health 93(1): 31-37.
38. Schwalberg R, Mathis SA, Mohamadi L, Zimmerman B, Sines E. 2001. Medicaid Coverage of Perinatal Services: Results of a National Survey. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.
39. Serra-Prat M, Gallo P, Jovell AJ, Aymerich M, Estrada MD. 1998. Trade-offs in prenatal detection of Down syndrome. Am J Public Health 88(4): 551-557.
40. Tabor A, Philip J, Madsen M, Bang J, Obel EB, Norgaard-Pedersen B. 1986. Randomised controlled trial of genetic amniocentesis in 4606 low-risk women. Lancet 1(8493): 1287-1293.
41. U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. 2003. Health People 2000: National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives. U.S. Public Health Service; Report No. 91-50212.
42. Wenstrom KD, Williamson RA, Grant SS, Hudson JD, Getchell JP. 1993. Evaluation of multiple-marker screening for Down syndrome in a statewide population. Am J Obstet Gynecol 169(4): 793-797.