Women's perception of information and experiences of nuchal translucency screening in Greece

Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 86-91

  Gourounti, Kleanthi ^a,e   Lykeridou, Katerina ^a   Daskalakis, Georgios ^b   Glentis, Stavros ^c   Sandall, Jane ^d   Antsaklis, Aris ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WEST ATTICA   (Greece)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS   (Greece)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^e King's College London ^*  (Greece)

Author keywords

Experience and pregnancy; NT screening, information, expectations; Nuchal translucency; Prenatal screening; Ultrasound scan, ultrasound screening

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; ATTITUDE TO PREGNANCY; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; FIRST TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; GREECE; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; MEDICAL INFORMATION; NUCHAL TRANSLUCENCY MEASUREMENT; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HOSPITAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; COMPREHENSION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENT SELECTION; PERCEPTION; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; PREGNANCY; PROSPECTIVE STUDY;

COMPREHENSION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; GREECE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HUMANS; NUCHAL TRANSLUCENCY MEASUREMENT; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENT SELECTION; PERCEPTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY TRIMESTER, FIRST; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 52049097053     PISSN: 10153837     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1159/000142133     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Clement S, Wilson J, Sikorski J: Women's experiences of antenatal ultrasound scans; in Clement S (ed): Psychological Perceptions on Pregnancy and Childbirth. Edinburgh, Churchill Livingstone, 1998.
2. Levi S: Routine ultrasound screening of congenital abnormalities. An overview of the European experience. Ann NY Acad Sci 1998;847:86-98.
3. McFayen A, Gledhill J, Whitlow B, Economides D: First trimester ultrasound screening, carries ethical and psychological implications. British Medical Journal 1998;317:694-695.
4. Bricker L, Garcia J, Henderson J, Mugford M, Neilson J, Roberts T, Martin M: Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: a systematic review of the clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness and women's views. Health Technol Assess 2000;4:16.
5. Lalor J, Begley C: Fetal anomaly screening: what do women want to know? J Adv Nurs 2006;55:11-19.
6. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists: Report of the RCOG Working Party on Biochemical Markers and the Detection of Down's Syndrome, London, RCOG, 1993.
7. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health: Fetal Abnormalities: Guidelines for Screening, Diagnosis and Management. London, RCOG & RCPCH, 1997.
8. Eurenius K, Axelsson O, Gallstedt-Fransson I, Sjoden PO: Percertion of information, expectations and experiences among women and their partners attending a second trimester routine ultrasound scan. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1997;9:86-90.
9. Gourounti K, Lykeridou K: Screening in public health: the case of prenatal screening for Down's syndrome. Rev Clin Pharmacol Pharmacokinet 2005;19:117-125.
10. Petticrew M, Sowden A, Lister-Sharp D, Wright K: False-negative results in screening programmes: a systematic review of impact and implications . Health Technol Assess 2000;4:1-120.
11. Van den Berg M, Timmermans DR, Oten Kate LP, van Vugt JM, van der Wal G: Are pregnant women making informed choices about prenatal screening? Genet Med 2005;7:332-338.
12. Larsen T, Nguyen TH, Munk M, Svendsen L, Teisner L: Ultrasound screening in the second trimester. The pregnant woman's background knowledge, expectations, experiences and acceptances. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2000;15:383-386.
13. Whynes DK: Receipt of information and women's attitudes towards ultrasound scanning during pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2002;19:7-12.
14. Gourounti K, Sandall J: Do pregnant women in Greece make informed choices about antenatal screening for Down syndrome? A questionnaire survey. Midwifery 2007; [Epub ahead of print].
15. Qvist I, Iversen M, Skajaa K: Attitudes and expectations of pregnant women to routine ultrasonography in early pregnancy. Ugeskr Laeger 2002;164:902-913.
16. Jaques A, Sheffield L, Halliday J: Informed choice in women attending private clinics to undergo first trimester screening for Down syndrome. Prenat Diagn 2005;25:656-664.
17. Sommerseth E: Experiences of pregnant women with information procedures in routine ultrasound examinations (in Norwegian). Tidsskr Nor Lægeforen 1993;113:1218-1220.
18. Rostant K, Steed L, O'Leary P: Survey of the knowledge, attitudes and experiences of Western Australian women in relation to prenatal screening and diagnostic procedures. Aust NZ J Obstet Gyneacol 2003;43:134-138.
19. Reading AE, Cox DN: The effects of ultrasound examination on maternal anxiety levels. J Behav Med 1982;5:237-247.
20. Kovacevic M: The impact of fetus visualisation on parents' psychological reactions. Pre- Perinatal Psychol J 1993;8:83-93.
21. Zlotogorski Z, Tadmor O, Duniec E, Rabinowitz R, Diamant Y: Anxiety levels of pregnant women during ultrasound examination: coping styles, amount of feedback and learned resourcefulness. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1995;6:425-429.
22. Verny T: The psycho-technology of pregnancy and labor. Pre- Perinatal Psychol J 1986;1:31-49.
23. Fletcher J, Evans M: Maternal bonding in early fetal ultrasound examinations. N Engl J Med 1983;308:392-393.
24. Mitchell L: Women's experiences of unexpected ultrasound findings. J Midwifery Womens Health 2004;49:228-234.
25. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists: Guidelines for Antenatal Care, Routine Care for the Healthy Pregnant Women, London, RCOG, 2003.
26. Stephens M, Montefalcon R, Lane D: The maternal perspective on prenatal ultrasound. J Fam Pract 2000;49:601-604.
27. Baillie C, Mason G, Hewison J: Scanning for pleasure. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;104:1223-1224.
28. Spenser K: Uptake of prenatal screening for chromosomal anomalies: impact of test results in a previous pregnancy. Prenat Diagn 2002;22:1229-1232.
29. Lalor J, Devane D: Information, knowledge and expectations of the routine ultrasound scan. Midwifery 2007;23:13-22.
30. Garcia J, Bricker L, Henderson J, Martin M, Mugford M, Nielson J, Roberts T: Womens' views of pregnancy ultrasound: a systematic review. Birth 2002;29:225-250.