Henneman Lidewij, Bramsen Inge, van Kempen Linda, van Acker Manita B, Pals Gerard, van der Horst Henriette E, Adèr Herman J, van der Ploeg Henk M, ten Kate Leo P
Department of Clinical Genetics and Human Genetics, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Community Genet. 2003;6(1):5-13. doi: 10.1159/000069540.
To investigate the feasibility and acceptability of different modes of offering preconceptional carrier screening for cystic fibrosis (CF) in the absence of established preconceptional care services.
Individuals aged 20-35 years were invited by mail, either by the Municipal Health Services (MHS) or by their own general practitioner (GP) to participate in a screening program with their partner. Pretest education was provided either during a group educational session or during a GP consultation. The reasons given by participants and nonrespondents for (not) responding to the invitation for screening, sociodemographic characteristics, and their attitudes were assessed by means of questionnaires.
Of 38,114 individuals who received a first invitation, approximately 20% had a partner with whom they were planning to have children. The response rate, as measured by attendance at either a group educational session or a GP consultation, was not affected by whether the letter was sent by the MHS or the person's GP. However, the response rate was about 2.5 times higher when the letter invited people to make an appointment with their GP for a consultation regarding CF carrier screening than when it invited them to attend an educational group session. A total of 559 couples (96%) consented to have the test after education. Repetition of the invitation increased the response. The main reason given by couples for not responding was "lack of time to attend" or "forgot about it" (48%). Another reason given was that they did not want to know their test results (28%). Eighty-nine percent of participants and 69% of nonrespondents believed that screening should be offered routinely to couples planning to have children. The GPs consulted (n = 18) reported no negative experiences, but due to the extra workload, 11 of them would not consider it to be part of their task.
Among couples planning to have children, there is generally a positive attitude towards routinely offering population-based CF carrier screening. Preconceptional CF carrier screening appeared feasible, both in terms of practical achievements and target group accessibility. Participation varied according to the pretest education setting, with the primary care setting producing the highest rate of attendance.
在缺乏既定孕前保健服务的情况下,调查提供囊性纤维化(CF)孕前携带者筛查不同模式的可行性和可接受性。
通过邮件邀请20至35岁的个体,由市卫生服务机构(MHS)或其自己的全科医生(GP)邀请他们与伴侣一起参加筛查项目。在小组教育课程或全科医生咨询期间提供预测试教育。通过问卷调查评估参与者和未参与者对筛查邀请(不)回应的原因、社会人口学特征及其态度。
在收到首次邀请的38114名个体中,约20%有计划与其生育子女的伴侣。以参加小组教育课程或全科医生咨询来衡量的回应率,不受信件是由MHS还是个人的全科医生发出的影响。然而,当信件邀请人们预约全科医生进行CF携带者筛查咨询时,回应率比邀请他们参加教育小组课程时高出约2.5倍。共有559对夫妇(96%)在接受教育后同意进行检测。重复邀请提高了回应率。夫妇不回应的主要原因是“没有时间参加”或“忘记了”(48%)。另一个原因是他们不想知道检测结果(28%)。89%的参与者和69%的未参与者认为应该对计划生育的夫妇常规提供筛查。接受咨询的全科医生(n = 18)报告没有负面经历,但由于额外的工作量,其中11人不认为这是他们任务的一部分。
在计划生育的夫妇中,对常规提供基于人群的CF携带者筛查普遍持积极态度。孕前CF携带者筛查在实际成果和目标群体可及性方面似乎都是可行的。参与情况因预测试教育环境而异,初级保健环境的参与率最高。