Women's experiences when ultrasound examinations give unexpected findings in the second trimester

Women and Birth

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 111-116

  Sommerseth, Eva ^a   Sundby, Johanne ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH EASTERN NORWAY   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

Autonomous choice; Screening; Termination; Ultrasound; Unexpected finding

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DENIAL; EMOTION; FEMALE; FETUS ECHOGRAPHY; GRIEF; GUILT; HOPE; HUMAN; NORWAY; PERSONAL EXPERIENCE; PREGNANCY TERMINATION; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SECOND TRIMESTER PREGNANCY; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; SOCIAL ISOLATION;

EID: 77955501962     PISSN: 18715192     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.wombi.2010.01.001     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Kvale S. Interviews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing 1996, Sage, Thousand Oaks, Calif.
2. Mitchell L. Women's experiences of unexpected ultrasound findings. Journal of Midwifery & Womens Health. 2004, 49(May-June (3)):228-234.
3. Chitty L.S., Kagan K.O., Molina F.S., Waters J.J., Nicolaides K.H. Fetal nuchal translucency scan and early prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities by rapid aneuploidy screening: observational study. Br Med J 2006, 332(February (7539)):452-455.
4. Spencer K. Aneuploidy screening in the first trimester. Am J Med Genet Part C Sermin 2007, 145.
5. Angels Martinez-Zamora M., Borrell A., Borobio V., Gonce A., Perez M., Botet F., et al. False positives in the prenatal ultrasound screening of fetal structural anomalies. Prenatal Diagnosis 2007, 27.
6. Blaaka G., Eri T.S. Doing midwifery between differnt belief systems. Midwifery. 2006, 2006(8):1-9.
7. Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet. Lov om svangerskapsavbrudd Oslo: Helse- og omsorgsdepartementet,; 1975.
8. Garcia J., Bricker L., Henderson J., Martin M.-A., Mugford M., Nielson J., et al. Women's views of pregnancy ultrasound: a systematic review. Birth 2002, 29(December (4)):225-250.
9. Wertz D.C., Fletcher J.C. A critique of some feminist challanges to prenatal diagnosis. Journal of Women's Health 1993, 2(2):173-188.
10. Sandelowski M. Channel of desire: fetal ultrasonography in two use-contexts. Qual Health Res 1994, 4(3):262.
11. Green J.M., Hewison J., Bekker H.L., Bryant L.D., Cuckle H.S. Psychosocial aspects of genetic screening of pregnant women and newborns: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess 2004, 8(33).
12. Kleinveld J., Timmermans D., De Smit D., Alder H., Van der Wal G., Ten Kate L.P. Does prenatal screening influence anxiety levels of pregnant women? A longitudinal randomized controlled trial. Prenatal Diagnosis 2006, 26(26):632-633.
13. Getz L., Kirkengen A.L. Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: advancing technology, soft markers for fetal chromosomal aberrations, and unacknowledged ethical dilemmas. Social Sci Med 2003, 56(10):2045-2057.
14. Rothman B.K. The tentative pregnancy 1986, Penguin Books, New York.
15. Nilsson K, Alton V, Axelsson O, Bokström H, Bul T, Crang-Svalenius E. Metoder för tidlig fosterdiagnostikk. En systematisk litteraturoversikt. Stocholm: SBU2006 Contract No.: 82.
16. Ritchie K, Boynton J, Bradbury I, Foster L, Iqbal K, Kohli H. Routine ultrasound scanning before 24 week of pregnancy. Glasgow: NHS Quality Improwement Scotland2004 Contract No.: 5.
17. McCoyd J.L.M. Pregnancy interrupted: Loss of a desired pregnancy after diagnosis of fetal anomaly. J Psychosomatic Obstetrics Gynecol 2007, 28(1).
18. Voelker R. The business of baby pictures. JAMA 2005, 293(January (1)).
19. Harris G., Connor L., Bisits A., Higginbotham N. " Seeing the baby": pleasures and dilemmas of ultrasound technologies for primiparous Australian women. Med Anthropol Quar 2004, 18(March (1)):23-47.
20. Bygdeman M., Ahlenius A. Fosterskada allt vanligare orsak till abort efter 18:e veckan. Läkartidningen 2005, 102(8):557-559.
21. Mezei G., Papp C., Toth-Pal E., Beke A., Papp Z. Factors influencing parental decision making in prenatal diagnosis of sex chromosome aneuploidy. Obstetrics Gynecol 2004, 104(July (1)):94-101.
22. Davies V., Gledhill J., McFadyen A., Whitlow B., Economides D. Psychological outcome in women undergoing termination of pregnancy for ultrasound-detected fetal anomaly in the first and second trimesters: a pilot study. Ultrasound Obstetrics Gynecol 2005, 25(April (4)):389-392.
23. Boyukydis Zachariah C.F., Treadwell M.C., Dellaney-Black V., Boyes K., King M., Robinson T., et al. Womens's responses to ultrasound examinations during routine screens in obsteric clinic. J Ultrasound Med 2006, 25.
24. Kvale S. Det kvalitative forskningsintervju. Oslo: Gyldendal Norsk Forlag AS; 2001.
25. Englesiden. 2003 [10.09.04]; Available from: http://www.englesiden.com/.
26. Bengtsson J. Sammenflatningar. Husserl og Merleau-Pontys fenomenologi. Gøteborg: Daidalos; 1993.
27. Merleau-Ponty M. Kroppens fenomenologi. Oslo: Pax; 1994.
28. Van den Berg M., Timmermans D.R.M., Kleinveld J.H., Garcia E., Van Vugt J.M.G., Van der Wal G. Accepting or declining the offer of prenatal screening for congenital defects: test uptake and women's reasons. Prenatal Diagnosis 2005, 25(January (1)):84-90.
29. Davies V., et al. Psychological outcome in women undergoing termination of pregnancy for ultrasound-detected fetal anomaly in the first and second trimesters: a pilot study. Ultrasound Obstetrics Gynecol 2005, 25(April (4)):389-392.
30. Salvesen K., Oyen L., Schmidt N., Malt U., Eik-Nes S. Comparison of long-term psychological responses of women after pregnancy termination due to fetal anomalies and after perinatal loss. Ultrasound Obstetrics Gynecol 1997, 9(2):80-85.
31. Ekelin M., Crang-Svalenius E., Dykes A.K. Midwives' attitudes to and knowledge about a newly introduced foetal screening method. Scandinavian J Caring Sci 2004, 18(3):287-293.
32. Offerdal K. Improved ultrasound imaging of the fetus and its consequences for severe and less anomalies 2008, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim.
33. Sommerseth E., Sundby J. Ultrasound screening and bodily expirience when fetal abnormality is indicated. Nordic J Nurs Res 2008, 2(3):159-163.
34. Schmidt L. Psykosociale konsekvenser af infertilitet og behandling 1996, FADL, København.
35. Heyman B., Hundt G., Sandall J. On being at a higher risk: a qualitative study of prenatal screening for chromosomal anomalies. Social Sci Med 2007, 62:2360-2372.
36. Smith R., Titmarsh S., Overton T. Improving pasient's knowledge of the fetal anomaly scan. Ultrasound Obstetrics Gynecol 2004, 24.
37. Whynes D.K. Receipt of information and women's attitudes towards ultrasound scanning during pregnancy. Ultrasound Obstetrics Gynecol 2002, 19(January (1)):7-12.
38. Nicolaides K.H., Chervenak F.A., McCullough L.B., Avgidou K., Papageorghiou A. 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 Obstetrics Gynecol 2005, 193(2):322-326.
39. Dyregrov K. Strategies of professional assistance after traumatic deaths: empowerment or disempowerment?. Scandinavian J Psychol 2004, 45(April (2)):181-189.
40. Hughes P., Turton P., Hopper E., Evans C.D.H. Assessment of guidelines for good practice in psychosocial care of mothers after stillbirth: a cohort study. Lancet 2002, 360(9327):114-118.
41. Hellesnes J. Sosialisering og teknokrati: Ein sosialfilosofisk studie med særleg vekt på pedagogikkens problem. Oslo,: Gyldendal; 1975.
42. Chervenak FA, McCullough LB, Davis J, NYPH, Gross S. Enhancing patient autonomy with risk assessment and invasive diagnosis: an ethical solution to a clinical challenge Genetics in medicine. 2008.