Prenatal diagnosis · 2015
Patient attitudes towards prenatal diagnostic testing for inherited retinal disease.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ahmed Khuram, Ahmed Mushtaq, Potrata Barbara, Willis Thomas A, Grant Hilary L, Allsop Matthew J, Hewison Jenny, Downey Louise, Gale Richard, McKibbin Martin
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To explore factors that influence decision-making in relation to prenatal diagnostic testing (PDT) for inherited retinal disease (IRD).
METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 50 adults with IRD, selected from a larger sample to provide a diversity of backgrounds and opinions on genetic testing. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Mostly participants supported PDT, believing that it would provide information to help them prepare for and plan the future care of the child and the potential for early access to emerging therapies. Opposition to PDT stemmed from its use to justify termination of pregnancy, with participants feeling that it was not justified as they retained a good quality of life despite their visual impairment. Participants raised concerns about the risk of PDT and the accuracy of the results. However, most suggested that it should be available as an option for others, but for specific reasons and not as a part of routine care.
CONCLUSION: The variation in attitudes towards PDT and uncertainty about the risk and accuracy of results suggest that individuals at risk of having a child with IRD should have access to genetic counselling to support decision making.
METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 50 adults with IRD, selected from a larger sample to provide a diversity of backgrounds and opinions on genetic testing. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Mostly participants supported PDT, believing that it would provide information to help them prepare for and plan the future care of the child and the potential for early access to emerging therapies. Opposition to PDT stemmed from its use to justify termination of pregnancy, with participants feeling that it was not justified as they retained a good quality of life despite their visual impairment. Participants raised concerns about the risk of PDT and the accuracy of the results. However, most suggested that it should be available as an option for others, but for specific reasons and not as a part of routine care.
CONCLUSION: The variation in attitudes towards PDT and uncertainty about the risk and accuracy of results suggest that individuals at risk of having a child with IRD should have access to genetic counselling to support decision making.