Abstract
In-person models of genetic counseling (GC) have been the common method in Japan for pregnant women to receive GC. However, recent increases in the number of pregnant women considering undergoing prenatal testing have made it challenging to retain individualized in-person care. To explore pregnant women’s opinions toward pretest GC models and the ideal time duration, a self-administered questionnaire survey was conducted for women at their first prenatal visit. A total of 114 valid respondents (93.4%) were included in the analyses. Of these, 80.7% of women preferred in-person GC, followed by classroom (9.6%), group (3.5%), and telegenetic-based GC (2.6%). Women with experience in undergoing prenatal testing significantly did not prefer in-person GC (p = 0.05). Sixty-two women (54.4%) preferred a duration of 15–29 min for pretest GC sessions, followed by 30–59 min (28.9%) and <15 min (14.9%). Women’s preference of ≥30 min in length was significantly associated with anhedonia, singleton pregnancies, acquaintance with people with trisomy 21, and awareness of prenatal testing. Women who were unaware of the need for agreement with the partner for prenatal testing and who did not know the average life expectancy of a trisomy 21 patient significantly preferred <15 min in length over other durations. While the majority of women preferred in-person GC for <30 min, their preferences varied by their background characteristics, experiences, attitudes, and knowledge. These findings will help establish a prenatal GC system offering a choice of GC models in Japan; however, further large-scale studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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
Nishiyama M, Yan J, Yotsumoto J, Sawai H, Sekizawa A, Kamei Y, et al. Chromosome abnormalities diagnosed in utero: a Japanese study of 28 983 amniotic fluid specimens collected before 22 weeks gestations. J Hum Genet. 2015;60:133–7.
Vital Statistics of Japan, Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare. Live births born in wedlock by single years of age of father and mother and live birth order: Japan. 2020. https://wwwe-sta tgojp/en.
Sago H, Sekizawa A, Japan NIPT consortium. Nationwide demonstration project of next-generation sequencing of cell-free DNA in maternal plasma in Japan: 1-year experience. Prenat Diagn. 2015;35:331–6.
Wilson KL, Czerwinski JL, Hoskovec JM, Noblin SJ, Sullivan CM, Harbison A, et al. NSGC practice guideline: prenatal screening and diagnostic testing options for chromosome aneuploidy. J Genet Couns. 2013;22:4–15.
Farrelly E, Cho MK, Erby L, Roter D, Stenzel A, Ormond K. Genetic counseling for prenatal testing: where is the discussion about disability? J Genet Couns. 2012;21:814–24.
Cohen SA, Gustafson SL, Marvin ML, Riley BD, Uhlmann WR, Liebers SB, et al. Report from the National Society of Genetic Counselors service delivery model task force: a proposal to define models, components, and modes of referral. J Genet Couns. 2012;21:645–51.
Cohen SA, Marvin ML, Riley BD, Vig HS, Rousseau JA, Gustafson SL. Identification of genetic counseling service delivery models in practice: a report from the NSGC Service Delivery Model Task Force. J Genet Couns. 2013;22:411–21.
Sasaki A, Sawai H, Masuzaki H, Hirahara F, Sago H. Low prevalence of genetic prenatal diagnosis in Japan. Prenat Diagn. 2011;31:1007–9.
Sasaki A, Yoshihashi H, Yamada S, Miyake H, Suzumori N, Takada F, et al. Current status of prenatal diagnosis in Japan 1998-2016. Nihon Shuusanki Shinseiji Igakkai Zasshi. 2018;54:101–7.
Shibata M, Akaishi R, Sasaki A, Ogawa K, Nishiyama M, Wada S, et al. Pregnant women’s preferences for prenatal genetic testing: a single-center study in Japan. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 2020;46:1972–6.
Nishiyama M, Sawai H, Kosugi S. The current state of genetic counseling before and after amniocentesis for fetal karyotyping in Japan: a survey of obstetric hospital clients of a prenatal testing laboratory. J Genet Couns. 2013;22:795–804.
Miyake H, Yamada S, Fujii Y, Sawai H, Arimori N, Yamanouchi Y, et al. Nationwide survey for current clinical status of amniocentesis and maternal serum marker test in Japan. J Hum Genet. 2016;61:879–84.
Hunter AG, Cappelli M, Humphreys L, Allanson JE, Chiu TT, Peeters C, et al. A randomized trial comparing alternative approaches to prenatal diagnosis counseling in advanced maternal age patients. Clin Genet. 2005;67:303–13.
Abrams DJ, Geier MR. A comparison of patient satisfaction with telehealth and on-site consultations: a pilot study for prenatal genetic counseling. J Genet Couns. 2006;15:199–205.
Knutzen DM, Stoll KA, McClellan MW, Deering SH, Foglia LM. Improving knowledge about prenatal screening options: can group education make a difference? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;26:1799–803.
Kuppermann M, Pena S, Bishop JT, Nakagawa S, Gregorich SE, Sit A, 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;312:1210–7.
Godino L, Pompilii E, D’Anna F, Morselli-Labate AM, Nardi E, Seri M, et al. Attitudes of women of advanced maternal age undergoing invasive prenatal diagnosis and the impact of genetic counselling. Eur J Hum Genet. 2016;24:331–7.
Cloutier M, Gallagher L, Goldsmith C, Akiki S, Barrowman N, Morrison S. Group genetic counseling: an alternate service delivery model in a high risk prenatal screening population. Prenat Diagn. 2017;37:1112–9.
Gammon BL, Otto L, Wick M, Borowski K, Allyse M. Implementing group prenatal counseling for expanded noninvasive screening options. J Genet Couns. 2018;27:894–901.
Carlson LM, Harris S, Hardisty EE, Hocutt G, Vargo D, Campbell E, et al. Use of a novel computerized decision aid for aneuploidy screening: a randomized controlled trial. Genet Med. 2019;21:923–9.
de Leeuw RA, van der Horst SFB, de Soet AM, van Hensbergen JP, Bakker P, Westerman M, et al. Digital vs face-to-face information provision in patient counselling for prenatal screening: a noninferiority randomized controlled trial. Prenat Diagn. 2019;39:456–63.
Whooley MA, Avins AL, Miranda J, Browner WS. Case-finding instruments for depression. Two questions are as good as many. J Gen Intern Med. 1997;12:439–45.
Thompson S, Noblin SJ, Lemons J, Peterson SK, Carreno C, Harbison A. Perceptions of Latinas on the traditional prenatal genetic counseling model. J Genet Couns. 2015;24:675–82.
Etchegary H, Potter B, Howley H, Cappelli M, Coyle D, Graham I, et al. The influence of experiential knowledge on prenatal screening and testing decisions. Genet Test. 2008;12:115–24.
Ternby E, Axelsson O, Anneren G, Lindgren P, Ingvoldstad C. Why do pregnant women accept or decline prenatal diagnosis for Down syndrome? J Community Genet. 2016;7:237–42.
Gavin NI, Gaynes BN, Lohr KN, Meltzer-Brody S, Gartlehner G, Swinson T. Perinatal depression: a systematic review of prevalence and incidence. Obstet Gynecol. 2005;106:1071–83.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the pregnant women who participated in this study. The study received support from the Grant of National Center for Child Health and Development 2019C-7 of Japan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nishiyama, M., Ogawa, K., Hasegawa, F. et al. Pregnant women’s opinions toward prenatal pretest genetic counseling in Japan. J Hum Genet 66, 659–669 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s10038-021-00902-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s10038-021-00902-4
This article is cited by
-
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)
-
Awareness of paternal age effect disorders among Japanese pregnant women: implications for prenatal genetic counseling for advanced paternal age
Journal of Community Genetics (2021)
