Prenatal counseling for congenital anomaly tests: Parental preferences and perceptions of midwife performance

Prenatal Diagnosis

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 341-353

  Martin, L ^a   Van Dulmen, S ^b,c,d   Spelten, E ^a   De Jonge, A ^a   De Cock, P ^a   Hutton, E ^a,e  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b NETHERLANDS INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH   (Netherlands)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH EASTERN NORWAY   (Norway)

^e MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CONGENITAL MALFORMATION; COUNSELING; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE SURVEY; HEALTH EDUCATION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MIDWIFE; MULTIPARA; NAMED INVENTORIES, QUESTIONNAIRES AND RATING SCALES; PARENTAL ATTITUDE; PATIENT DECISION MAKING; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PERCEPTION; PERFORMANCE; PREGNANT WOMAN; PRENATAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF CARE THROUGH CLIENTS EYES PRENATAL QUESTIONNAIRE; QUESTIONNAIRE;

ADULT; CONGENITAL ABNORMALITIES; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; GENETIC COUNSELING; HEALTH EDUCATION; HUMANS; MALE; MIDWIFERY; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PREGNANCY; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84875660109     PISSN: 01973851     EISSN: 10970223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/pd.4074     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Jakobsen TR, Sogaard K, Tabor A. Implications of a first trimester Down's syndrome screening program on timing of malformation detection. Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavica. Nord Fed Society Obstet Gyn 2011;90:728-36.
2. Korenromp M. Prenatal adaptation to termination of pregnancy for fetal anomalies. Utrecht: Dissertation UMC Utrecht, 2006:11-3.
3. Tischler R, Hudgins L, Blumenfeld YJ, et al. Noninvasive prenatal diagnosis: pregnant women's interest and expected uptake. Prenat Diagn 2011;31(13):1292-9.
4. Flessel MC, Lorey FW. The California Prenatal Screening Program: "options and choices" not "coercion and eugenics". Genetic Medicine 2011;13(8):711-3.
5. Garcia ME, Timmermans DRM, Van Leeuwen E. Rethinking autonomy in the context of prenatal screening decision-making. Prenat Diagn 2008;28:115-20.
6. Health Counsel of the Netherlands. Population screening Act: first start with a nationwide program for prenatal screening: Down's syndrome and neural tube defects. The Hague: Health Counsel of the Netherlands, 2006 publication no. 2006-03.
7. Resta RG. Defining and redefining the scope and goals of genetic counseling. Am J Med Genetics Part C 2006;142C:269-75.
8. Liefhebber S, Van Dam C, Waelput A. Dutch professional profile midwives. Utrecht: Royal Dutch organization of Midwives (KNOV), 2005.
9. Meiser B, Irle J, Lobb E, et al. Assessment of the content and process of genetic counseling: a critical review of empirical. Studies. J Genetic Couns 2008;17:434-51.
10. Resta R, Bowles - Biesecker B, Bennett RL, et al. A new definition of genetic counseling: National Society of Genetic Counselors' Task Force report. J Genet Counsel 2006;15(2):77-83.
11. Van Zwieten MCB. The importance of an informed choice, but what concerns the choice? The complex decision-making in prenatal screening. De Psycholoog 2008;43:20-5.
12. Roter D, Ellington L, Hamby Erby L, et al. The genetic counseling video project (GCVP). Am J Med Genetics Part C 2006; (142C): 209-20.
13. De Boer J, Zeeman K. KNOV-guideline prenatal midwifery led care: recommendation for coaching, interaction and information giving. Utrecht: KNOV, 2008:17-46.
14. Durand MA, Stiel M, Boivin J, et al. Information and decision support needs of parents considering amniocentesis: interviews with pregnant women and health professionals. Health Expect 2010;13(2):125-38.
15. Kreuter MW, Strecker VJ, Glassman B. One size does not fit all: the case for tailoring print materials. Annals Behav Medicine 1999;21(4):276-83.
16. Mearns D, Thorne B. Person-Centered Counselling in Action. London: Sage Publications, (2nd edn), 1999;5-21.
17. Petty R, Cacioppo J. The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances Experimental Social Psychology 1986;19:123-205.
18. Todd J, Bohart AC. Foundations of Clinical and Counseling Psychology. New York: HarperCollins College Publishers, (3rd edn), 2005;209-39.
19. chemo: a patient-centered instrument to measure quality of care preceding chemotherapy treatment through the patient's eyes. Europ J Cancer 2009;45(17):2967-76.
20. Shiloh S, Gerad L, Goldman B. Patients' information needs and decision-making processes: what can be learned from genetic counselees? Health Psychol 2006;25(2):211-9.
21. Kessler S. Psychological aspects of genetic counseling: XI. Teaching and counseling. J Genetic Counsel 1999a;6:287-95.
22. RIVM. [WWW document]. URL http://www.rivm.nl/Onderwerpen/Onderwerpen/D/Downscreening.html [accessed on 19 July 2012].
23. Mannien J, Klomp T, Wiegers T, et al. Evaluation of primary care midwifery in the Netherlands: design and rationale of a dynamic cohort study (DELIVER). BMC Health Serv Res 2012;12(69), DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-69.
24. Pieterse A, Van Dulmen S, Ausems M, et al. QUOTE-GENEca: development of a counselee-centered instrument to measure needs and preferences in genetic counselling for hereditary cancer. Psychooncology 2005;14:361-75.
25. Sixma HJ, Van Campen C, Kerssens JJ, et al. Quality of care from the patients' perspectives: from theoretical concept to a new measuring instrument. Health Expect 1998;1:82-95.
26. Van den Brink-Muinen A, Van Dulmen AM, Jung HP, et al. Do our talks with patient meet their expectations? Yes, for the most part. J Fam Pract 2007;56:559-68.
27. Nijkamp MD, Sixma HJ, Afman H, et al. Quality of care from the perspective of the cataract patient: the reliability and validity of the QUOTE-cataract. British J Ophthalmol 2002;86:840-2.
28. Costello AB, Osborne JW. Exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract Assess Res Eval 2005;10(7):1-9.
29. Cook DA, Beckman TJ. Current concepts in validity and reliability for psychometric instruments: theory and application. Am J Med 2006;119:166.e7-16.
30. Field A. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. London: Sage Publishers, (3rd edn), 2009;627-85.
31. Gutteling JJ, De Man RA, Busschbach JJ, et al. Quality of health care and patient satisfaction in liver disease: the development and preliminary results of the QUOTE-Liver questionnaire. BMC Gastroenterol 2008;8:25-32.
32. Ellington L, Roter DL, Dudley W, et al. Communication analysis of BRCA1 genetic counseling. J Genet Couns 2005;14:377-86.
33. Beckendorf JL, Prince MB, Rose MA, et al. Does indirect speech promote non-directive genetic counseling? Results of a sociolinguistic investigation. Am J Med Genetics 2001;106:199-207.
34. Van den Berg M, Timmermans DR, Ten Kate LP, et al. Are counsellors' attitude influencing pregnant women's attitudes and decisions on prenatal screening? Prenat Diagn 2007;27:518-24.
35. Smets E, Van Zwieten M, Michie S. Comparing genetic counseling with non-genetic health care interactions: two of a kind? Patient Educ Couns 2007;68:225-34.
36. Van Zwieten MCB. Non-directivity: a controversial concept. TvG 2003;13(1):20-2.
37. Van Zwieten MCB, Willems D, Knegt L, et al. Communication with patients during the prenatal testing procedure: an explorative qualitative study. Pat Educ and Couns 2006;63:161-8.
38. The Netherlands Perinatal Registry. 10 Years Perinatal Registration in the Netherlands; an Overview. Utrecht: Stichting Perinatale Registratie Nederland, 2011;26-39.
39. Van den Berg M, Timmermans DR, Ten Kate LP, et al. Informed decision making in the context of prenatal screening. Patient Educ Couns 2006;63(1-2):110-7.
40. Kleinveld JH. Psychological Consequences of Prenatal Screening. Amsterdam: Dissertation VU Medical Centre, 2008;18.
41. de Grient- Dreux A, Kooijman H, Korenromp M. Prenatal tests. About Choices and Dilemmas. Houten: Het Spectrum 2008:46-62.
42. National Public Health Compass. [WWW document]. URL http://www.nationaalkompas.nl/gezondheid-en-ziekte/ziekte-en-aandoeningen/aangeboren-afwijkingen/centrale-zenuwstelsel/diagnose-behandeling.html [accessed on 19 July 2012].
43. Wiegers TA, Hingstman L. Het veranderende takenpakket van verloskundigen. Nieuwe cijfers over tijdsbesteding aan specifieke taken. TvV 2008;3:19-24.
44. Hoogendoorn M, Hamberg-van Reenen HH, van Genugten MLL, et al. Comparison of costs and effects of prenatal screening methods for Down's syndrome and neural tube defects. Bilthoven: RIVM rapport, 2004; publication no. 230041001/2004: 7-12.
45. Houwink EJF, van Luijk SJ, Henneman L, et al. Genetic educational needs and role of genetics in primary care: a focus group study with multiple perspectives. BMC Fam Pract 2011;12:5.