Ethical considerations in first-trimester Down syndrome risk assessment

Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 135-138

  Chervenak, Frank A ^a   McCullough, Laurence B ^b  

^a WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

^b BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Ethics; First trimester risk assessment; Informed consent; Trisomy 21

Indexed keywords

BIOCHEMISTRY; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; DOWN SYNDROME; FETUS ECHOGRAPHY; FIRST TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL ETHICS; PATIENT AUTONOMY; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; TRISOMY 21;

DOWN SYNDROME; FEMALE; HUMANS; MATERNAL AGE; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY TRIMESTER, FIRST; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 77949357352     PISSN: 1040872X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283374a9f     Document Type: Review

References (26)

1. Chervenak FA, McCullough LB. Implementation of first-trimester risk assessment for trisomy 21: ethical considerations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 192:1777-1781.
2. Chervenak FA, McCullough LB, Chasen ST. Clinical implications of the ethics of informed consent for first-trimester risk assessment for trisomy 21. Semin Perinatol 2005; 29:277-279.
3. Chervenak FA, McCullough LB, Sharma G, et al. Enhancing patient autonomy with risk assessment and invasive diagnosis: an ethical solution to a clinical challenge. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1008; 1999:19. e1-19.e4.
4. Wear A. Medical ethics in early modern England. In: Wear A, Geyer-Kordesch J, French P, editors. Doctors and ethics: the earlier historical setting of professional ethics. Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi; 1993. pp. 98-130.
5. McCullough LB. John Gregory and the invention of professional medical ethics and the profession of medicine. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1998.
6. Powderly KE. Patient consent and negotiation in the Brooklyn gynecological practice of Alexander J.C. Skene: 1863-1900. J Med Philos 2000; 25:12-27.
7. Faden RR, Beauchamp TL. A history and theory of informed consent. New York, USA: Oxford University Press; 1986.
8. McCullough LB, Chervenak FA. Ethics in obstetrics and gynecology. New York, USA: Oxford University Press; 1994.
9. McCullough LB, Chervenak FA. Informed consent. Clin Perinatol 2007; 34:275-285.
10. Wear S. Informed consent: patient autonomy and clinician beneficence within healthcare. ed. 2 Washington, District of Columbia, USA: Georgetown University Press; 1998.
11. Nicolaides KH, Azar G, Byrne D, et al. Fetal nuchal translucency ultrasound screening for chromosomal defects in first trimester pregnancy. BMJ 1992; 304:867-869.
12. Snijders RJM, Noble P, Sebire N, et al. UK multicentre project on assessment of risk of trisomy 21 by maternal age and fetal nuchal translucency thickness at 10-14 weeks of gestation. Lancet 1998; 351:343-346.
13. Nicolaides KH. Nuchal translucency and other first-trimester sonographic markers of chromosomal abnormalities. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 191:45-67.
14. Wapner R, Thom E, Simpson JL, et al. First-trimester screening for trisomies 21 and 18. N Engl J Med 2003; 349:1405-1413.
15. Chervenak FA, McCullough LB, Chervenak JL. Prenatal informed consent for sonogram: an indication for obstetric ultrasonography. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1989; 161:857-860.
16. Nicolaides KH, Chervenak FA, McCullough LB, et al. Evidence-based obstetric ethics and informed decision making by pregnant women about invasive diagnosis after first-trimester assessment of risk for trisomy 21. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2006; 193:322-326.
17. Zoppi MA, Ibba RM, Putzolu M, et al. Nuchal translucency and the acceptance of invasive prenatal chromosomal diagnosis in women aged 35 and older. Obstet Gynecol 2001; 97:916-920.
18. Chasen ST, McCullough LB, Chervenak FA. Is nuchal translucency screening associated with different rates of invasive testing in an older obstetric population? Am J Obstet Gynecol 2004; 190:769-774.
19. Chasen ST, Skupski DW, McCullough LB, Chervenak FA. Prenatal informed consent for sonogram: the time for first-trimester nuchal translucency has come. J Ultrasound Med 2001; 20:1147-1152.
20. Chasen ST, Skupski DW, Chervenak FA, McCullough LB. First-trimester nuchal translucency screening: reply. J Ultrasound Med 2002; 21:483-487.
21. Hackshaw AK, Wald NJ. Assessment of the value of reporting partial screening results in prenatal screening for Down syndrome. Prenat Diag 2001; 21:737-740.
22. Wald NJ, Rodeck C, Hackshaw AK, et al. First and second trimester antenatal screening for Down's syndrome: the results of the Serum, Urine, and Ultrasound Screening Study (SURUSS). J Med Screen 2003; 10:56-104.
23. Kornman LH, Wortelboer MJM, Beekhuis JR, et al. Women's opinions and the implications of first- versus second-trimester screening for fetal Down's syndrome. Prenat Diag 1997; 17:1011-1018.
24. Mulvey S, Wallace EM. Women's knowledge of and attitudes to first and second trimester screening for Down's syndrome. Br J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 107:1302-1305.
25. Sharma G, Gold HT, Chervenak FA, et al. Patient preference regarding firsttrimester aneuploidy risk assessment. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2005; 193:1429-1436.
26. American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Committee on Practice Bulletins. Screening for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 109:217-227.