Abstract
Early in pregnancy women and their partners face the complex decision on whether or not to participate in prenatal testing for fetal chromosomal abnormalities. Several studies show that the majority of pregnant women currently do not make informed decisions regarding prenatal testing. As the range of prenatal tests is expanding due to the development of new techniques such as non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), autonomous reproductive decision-making is increasingly challenging. In this study, a randomised controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the effect of a web-based multimedia decision aid on decision-making regarding prenatal testing. The decision aid provided both written and audiovisual information on prenatal tests currently available, that is, prenatal screening by first-trimester combined testing, NIPT and invasive diagnostic testing through chorionic villus sampling or amniocentesis. Furthermore, it contained values clarification exercises encouraging pregnant women to reflect on the potential harms and benefits of having prenatal tests performed. The use of the decision aid improved informed decision-making regarding prenatal testing. Of pregnant women allocated to the intervention group (n=130) 82.3% made an informed choice compared with 66.4% of women in the control group (n=131), P=0.004. As the vast majority of pregnant women made decisions consistent with their attitudes towards having prenatal testing performed, this improvement in informed decision-making could be attributed mainly to an increase in decision-relevant knowledge. This study shows that the implementation of a web-based multimedia decision aid directly facilitates the ultimate goal of prenatal testing for fetal chromosomal abnormalities, which is enabling informed autonomous reproductive choice.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Health Council of the Netherlands. Prenatal screening: Down syndrome, neural tube defects, routine ultrasonography. The Hague: Health Council of the Netherlands, 2001; publication no. 2001/11.
De Jong A, Dondorp WJ, Frints SGM, De Die-Smulders CEM, De Wert GMWR : Advances in prenatal screening: the ethical dimension. Nat Rev Genet 2011; 12: 657–663.
Marteau TM, Dormandy E, Michie S : A measure of informed choice. Health Expect 2001; 4: 99–108.
Michie A, Dormandy E, Marteau TM : The multi-dimensional measure of informed choice: a validation study. Patient Educ Couns 2002; 48: 87–91.
Green JM, Hewison J, Bekker HL, Bryant LD, Cuckle HS : Psychosocial aspects of genetic screening of pregnant women and newborns: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess 2004; 8: 1–128.
Ames AG, Metcalfe SA, Archibald AD, Duncan RE, Emery J : Measuring informed choice in population-based reproductive genetic screening: a systematic review. Eur J Human Genet 2015; 23: 8–21.
Stacey D, Légare F, Col NF et al Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014, issue 1.
Elwyn G, O'Connor AM, Stacey D et al: Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. BMJ 2006; 333: 417.
Elwyn G, O'Connor AM, Bennett C et al: Assessing the quality of decision support technologies using the international patient decision aid standards instrument (IPDASi). PLoS One 2009; 4: e4705.
Web-based multimedia decision aid on prenatal testing. Available at http://www.keuzehulp.info/radboud/pnt (accessed on 03 March 2016).
Schoonen HM, van Agt HM, Essink-Bot ML, Wildschut HI, Steegers EA, de Koning HJ : Informed decision-making in prenatal screening for Down's syndrome: what knowledge is relevant? Patient Educ Couns 2011; 84: 265–270.
Schoonen M, Wildschut H, Essink-Bot ML, Peters I, Steegers E, de Koning H : The provision of information and informed decision-making on prenatal screening for Down syndrome: a questionnaire-based and register-based survey in a non-selected population. Patient Educ Couns 2012; 87: 351–359.
van den Berg M, Timmermans DRM, Ten Kate LP, van Vugt JMG, van der Wal G : Are pregnant women making informed choices about prenatal screening? Genet Med 2005; 7: 332–338.
Fransen MP, Essink-Bot ML, Vogel I, Mackenbach JP, Steegers EA, Wildschut HI : Ethnic differences in informed decision-making about prenatal screening for Down's syndrome. J Epidemiol Community Health 2010; 64: 262–268.
O'Connor AM : Validation of a decisional conflict scale. Med Decis Making 1995; 15: 25–30.
Koedoot N, Molenaar S, Oosterveld P et al: The decisional conflict scale: further validation in two samples of Dutch oncology patients. Patient Educ Couns 2001; 45: 187–193.
Brehaut JC, O'Connor AM, Wood TJ et al: Validation of a decision regret scale. Med Decis Making 2003; 23: 281–292.
Marteau TM, Bekker H : The development of a six-item short-form of the state scale of the Spielberger state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI). Br J Clin Psychol 1992; 31: 301–306.
Van der Bij AK, de Weerd S, Cikot RJ, Steegers EA, Braspenning JC : Validation of the Dutch short form of the state scale of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety inventory: considerations for usage in screening outcomes. Community Genet 2003; 6: 84–87.
Lewis C, Hill M, Skirton H, Chitty LS : Development and validation of a measure of informed choice for women undergoing non-invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy. Eur J Hum Genet 2015, ; e-pub ahead of print 28 October 2015; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2015.207..
Beulen L, Grutters JP, Faas BH et al: Women’s and healthcare professionals’ preferences for prenatal testing: a discrete choice experiment. Prenat Diagn 2015; 35: 549–557.
Hunter AGW, Cappelli M, Humphreys L et al: A randomized trial comparing alternative approaches to prenatal diagnosis counseling in advanced maternal age patients. Clin Genet 2005; 67: 303–313.
Nagle C, Gunn J, Bell R et al: Use of a decision aid for prenatal testing of fetal abnormalities to improve women's informed decision making: a cluster randomised controlled trial. BJOG 2008; 115: 339–347.
Hewison J, Cuckle H, Baillie C et al: Use of videotapes for viewing at home to inform choice in Down syndrome screening: a randomised controlled trial. Prenat Diagn 2001; 21: 146–149.
Björklund U, Marsk A, Levin C, Öhman SG : Audiovisual information affects informed choice and experience of information in antenatal Down syndrome screening: a randomized controlled trial. Patient Educ Couns 2012; 86: 390–395.
Kuppermann M, Norton ME, Gates E et al: Computerized prenatal genetic testing decision-assisting tool: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol 2009; 113: 53–63.
Kuppermann M, Pena S, Bishop JT et al: Effect of enhanced information, values clarification, and removal of financial barriers on use of prenatal genetic testing: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2014; 312: 1210–1217.
Skjoth MM, Draburg E, Lamont RF et al: Informed choice about Down syndrome screening - effect of an eHealth tool: a randomized controlled trial. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2015; 94: 1327–1336.
Faas BH : Prenatal genetic care: debates and considerations of the past, present and future. Expert Opin Biol Ther 2015; 15: 1101–1105.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to all pregnant women and healthcare professionals who have participated in this study. This study was financially supported by the Foundation for Prenatal Screening in the Nijmegen Region.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Supplementary Information accompanies this paper on European Journal of Human Genetics website
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Beulen, L., van den Berg, M., Faas, B. et al. The effect of a decision aid on informed decision-making in the era of non-invasive prenatal testing: a randomised controlled trial. Eur J Hum Genet 24, 1409–1416 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2016.39
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2016.39
This article is cited by
-
Exploring attitudes and experiences with reproductive genetic carrier screening among couples seeking medically assisted reproduction: a longitudinal survey study
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (2024)
-
Impact of shared decision making on healthcare in recent literature: a scoping review using a novel taxonomy
Journal of Public Health (2023)
-
Development and use of the Australian reproductive genetic carrier screening decision aid
European Journal of Human Genetics (2022)
-
Routinization of prenatal screening with the non-invasive prenatal test: pregnant women’s perspectives
European Journal of Human Genetics (2022)
-
Multisite assessment of the impact of a prenatal testing educational App on patient knowledge and preparedness for prenatal testing decision making
Journal of Community Genetics (2022)
