Premium
Uptake of prenatal diagnostic testing and the effectiveness of prenatal screening for Down syndrome
Author(s) -
Jaques Alice M.,
Collins Veronica R.,
Muggli Evelyne E.,
Amor David J.,
Francis Ivan,
Sheffield Leslie J.,
Halliday Jane L.
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
prenatal diagnosis
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.956
H-Index - 97
eISSN - 1097-0223
pISSN - 0197-3851
DOI - 10.1002/pd.2509
Subject(s) - medicine , prenatal diagnosis , down syndrome , diagnostic test , prenatal screening , pregnancy , medical diagnosis , risk assessment , screening test , obstetrics , triple test , pediatrics , fetus , pathology , psychiatry , genetics , computer security , computer science , biology
Objectives To map prenatal screening and diagnostic testing pathways in Victorian pregnant women during 2003 to 2004; measure the impact of prenatal diagnostic testing uptake on the effectiveness of prenatal screening for Down syndrome; and assess factors influencing uptake of diagnostic testing following screening. Methods State‐wide data collections of prenatal screening and diagnostic tests were linked to all Victorian births and pregnancy terminations for birth defects. Results Overall, 52% of women had a prenatal test (65 692/126 305); screening (44.9%), diagnostic testing (3.9%), or both (3.2%). Uptake of diagnostic testing was 71.4% (2390/3349) after an increased risk screen result, and 2.5% (1381/54 286) after a low risk result. Variation in uptake of diagnostic testing reduced the effectiveness of the screening program by 11.2%: from 87.4% (sensitivity − 125/143) to 76.2% (prenatal diagnoses of Down syndrome − 109/143). In both the increased and low risk groups, uptake was influenced by absolute numerical risk, as well as by the change in numerical risk from a priori risk. Conclusions This comprehensive follow‐up demonstrates clearly that numerical risk is being used to aid in decision making about confirmatory diagnostic testing. Collectively, these fundamental individual decisions will impact on the overall effectiveness of screening programmes for Down syndrome. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.