JIMD reports · 2011
Psychosocial aspects of predictive genetic testing for acute intermittent porphyria in norwegian minors.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Andersen Janice, Sandberg Sverre, Raaheim Maalfrid, Gjengedal Eva
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The Norwegian Porphyria Centre routinely offers genetic counselling and predictive genetic testing in families diagnosed with porphyria. The aim of this study was to investigate the subjective experiences of adolescents and young adults who were genetically tested for acute intermittent porphyria (AIP) as minors. What were the psychosocial consequences and how were these handled?
METHODS: Qualitative interviews of ten Norwegians aged 16-21 years were performed and analysed based on interpretive description. All participants were initially predictively tested for AIP as minors, but three had subsequently developed manifest disease.
RESULTS: The participants considered early diagnosis and lifestyle moderation advantageous, but finding motivation for precaution was difficult. AIP inflicted few psychosocial challenges and was a small part of the participants' identity, but risk of manifest disease was, nevertheless, a cause for concern for two participants with latent AIP. The participants were content with their present level of knowledge and they felt capable of obtaining relevant information when needed. AIP was experienced as a vague condition, and participants and their relatives attributed a variety of symptoms to the disease.
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Being genetically tested as a minor was experienced as useful and entailed relatively few adverse psychosocial consequences, although there was a potential for concern. Appropriate and individually tailored genetic counselling and written consent is subsequently advised. What constitutes a suitable age for testing will differ from individual to individual, but these results suggest that parents in collaboration with their children may be suited to decide what age is appropriate.
METHODS: Qualitative interviews of ten Norwegians aged 16-21 years were performed and analysed based on interpretive description. All participants were initially predictively tested for AIP as minors, but three had subsequently developed manifest disease.
RESULTS: The participants considered early diagnosis and lifestyle moderation advantageous, but finding motivation for precaution was difficult. AIP inflicted few psychosocial challenges and was a small part of the participants' identity, but risk of manifest disease was, nevertheless, a cause for concern for two participants with latent AIP. The participants were content with their present level of knowledge and they felt capable of obtaining relevant information when needed. AIP was experienced as a vague condition, and participants and their relatives attributed a variety of symptoms to the disease.
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Being genetically tested as a minor was experienced as useful and entailed relatively few adverse psychosocial consequences, although there was a potential for concern. Appropriate and individually tailored genetic counselling and written consent is subsequently advised. What constitutes a suitable age for testing will differ from individual to individual, but these results suggest that parents in collaboration with their children may be suited to decide what age is appropriate.