4.4 Article

Cell-free fetal DNA testing: a pilot study of obstetric healthcare provider attitudes toward clinical implementation

Journal

PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS
Volume 31, Issue 11, Pages 1070-1076

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pd.2835

Keywords

psychosocial; legal; and ethical implications; cell-free fetal DNA; cell-free fetal RNA; non-invasive prenatal diagnosis; healthcare provider perspectives; clinical translation

Funding

  1. NIH [P50 HG003389]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective To provide a preliminary assessment of obstetric healthcare provider opinions surrounding implementation of cell-free fetal DNA testing. Methods A 37-question pilot survey was used to address questions around the translation and use of non-invasive prenatal testing using cell-free fetal DNA. The survey was distributed and collected at a Continuing Medical Education course on obstetrics and gynecology. Results Of 62 survey respondents, 73% were female and 87% held MD/DO degrees. Respondents generally agreed that patients want prenatal diagnostic information to help make decisions about a pregnancy and that cell-free fetal DNA testing would encourage the testing of more patients for more conditions. However, there was an overall lack of knowledge or conviction about using this technology. Genetic counseling and professional society approval were deemed important to implementation, whereas the possibility of direct-to-consumer testing and government regulation produced mixed responses. Respondents indicated that they would be more likely to offer cell-free fetal DNA testing for chromosomal abnormalities and single-gene disorders, but would be cautious with respect to determination of sex and behavioral or late-onset conditions. Conclusion Preliminary assessment indicates uncertainty among obstetric providers about the details of implementing cell-free fetal DNA testing and suggests expanded research on perspectives of this stakeholder group. Copyright. (C) 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available