Suppr超能文献

迎接新常态:染色体疾病产前筛查中“获得信息”与“拥有选择权”的体验:一项定性研究

Time for a New Norm: Experiences of 'Being Informed' and 'Having Choice' for Prenatal Screening for Chromosomal Conditions: A Qualitative Study.

作者信息

Ireland-Blake Niamh, Cram Fiona, Dew Kevin, Bacharach Sondra, Stone Peter, Snelling Jeanne, Buchanan Christina, Filoche Sara

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Women's Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.

Katoa Ltd, Auckland, New Zealand.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2025 Jun;28(3):e70292. doi: 10.1111/hex.70292.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Participating in prenatal screening for chromosomal conditions is premised on an informed choice to accept or decline.

AIM

The aims of this paper are to describe people's experiences of informed choice and how these relate to the experience of prenatal screening.

METHOD

Thirty-eight people were recruited and their experiences were explored through narrative enquiry, following an iterative and in-depth reflexive analysis.

FINDINGS

Informed choice meant 'being informed' in ways that met people's cultural needs, values and preferences (e.g., how much information and how it was communicated) and 'having choice' (e.g., choice about 'being informed', who was involved and choice to enact the decision). 'Being informed' affected 'having choice'. Four themes describe experiences of how informed choice as an ethical principle was upheld: 'All I knew it was something that should be done', 'Going in blind', 'It would have been frowned upon' and 'I knew I could decline'. For example, the experience of 'I knew I could decline' describes how the ethical principle of 'informed choice' was fully realised. There was a choice about how information was shared that meant people gained knowledge about prenatal screening and a choice about who was involved in this process. A relational experience for 'being informed' (e.g., with their pregnancy carer and the decision-makers) was upheld. People knew that they would be fully supported in enacting their decision. These experiences were not common.

CONCLUSIONS

In the absence of 'being informed', the possibility for 'having choice' is eroded. 'Having choice' requires people to have information so that it meets their needs, values and preferences to make sense of it as it relates to their values for decision-making. Considering 'being informed' as an epistemic justice obligation would mitigate eroding the possibility of 'having choice'. For example, when people experienced prenatal screening as 'I knew I could decline', it was an epistemically just experience as all the elements for 'being informed' for them were met and the relational experience upheld 'having choice'. The challenge remains for this to be the experience for everyone considering prenatal screening, not just in Aotearoa but globally.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

The interview questions were reviewed through group discussion with eight people who had lived experiences of prenatal screening for chromosomal conditions. The research was also informed by a researcher who had no lived experience of the screening service as a counter-view. The premise of this study is to highlight how women and pregnant people experience the consenting process for prenatal screening. The findings may inform organisations, researchers and practitioners about developing approaches for better enabling informed choice in future practice.

摘要

背景

参与染色体疾病的产前筛查是以接受或拒绝的知情选择为前提的。

目的

本文的目的是描述人们的知情选择经历以及这些经历与产前筛查经历的关系。

方法

招募了38人,并通过叙事探究对他们的经历进行了探索,随后进行了迭代和深入的反思性分析。

结果

知情选择意味着以满足人们文化需求、价值观和偏好的方式“了解信息”(例如,信息的数量以及传达方式)以及“拥有选择”(例如,关于“了解信息”的选择、参与的人员以及做出决定的选择)。“了解信息”影响“拥有选择”。四个主题描述了作为一项伦理原则的知情选择是如何得到维护的经历:“我只知道这是应该做的事情”、“盲目参与”、“这会遭人非议”以及“我知道我可以拒绝”。例如,“我知道我可以拒绝”的经历描述了“知情选择”这一伦理原则是如何充分实现的。在信息共享方式上存在选择,这意味着人们获得了有关产前筛查的知识,并且在参与这一过程的人员方面也有选择。“了解信息”的一种关系体验(例如,与他们的孕期护理人员和决策者)得到了维护。人们知道在做出决定时会得到充分支持。但这些经历并不常见。

结论

在缺乏“了解信息”的情况下,“拥有选择”的可能性会受到侵蚀。“拥有选择”要求人们拥有信息,以便这些信息符合他们的需求、价值观和偏好,从而使其与他们的决策价值观相关联并具有意义。将“了解信息”视为一种认知公正义务将减轻侵蚀“拥有选择”可能性的情况。例如,当人们将产前筛查体验为“我知道我可以拒绝”时,这是一种认知公正的体验,因为满足了他们“了解信息”的所有要素,并且关系体验维护了“拥有选择”。对于每个考虑进行产前筛查的人来说,要让这种情况成为一种体验仍然是一个挑战,不仅在新西兰,而且在全球范围内都是如此。

患者或公众贡献

通过与八名有染色体疾病产前筛查亲身经历的人进行小组讨论,对访谈问题进行了审查。该研究还受到一位没有筛查服务亲身经历的研究人员的观点的启发,作为一种反观点。本研究的前提是突出女性和孕妇在产前筛查同意过程中的体验。研究结果可能会为组织、研究人员和从业者在未来实践中制定更好地实现知情选择的方法提供参考。

相似文献

3
Exploring informed choice in the context of prenatal testing: findings from a qualitative study.
Health Expect. 2008 Dec;11(4):355-65. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00493.x. Epub 2008 Sep 16.
7
Are pregnant women making informed choices about prenatal screening?
Genet Med. 2005 May-Jun;7(5):332-8. doi: 10.1097/01.gim.0000162876.65555.ab.
8
The effectiveness of health literacy interventions on the informed consent process of health care users: a systematic review protocol.
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Oct;13(10):82-94. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-2304.
10
Attitude, knowledge and informed choice towards prenatal screening for Down Syndrome: a cross-sectional study.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018 Nov 12;18(1):439. doi: 10.1186/s12884-018-2077-6.

本文引用的文献

1
Indigenous sovereignty in research and epistemic justice: Truth telling through research.
Glob Public Health. 2025 Dec;20(1):2436436. doi: 10.1080/17441692.2024.2436436. Epub 2024 Dec 11.
2
Epistemic justice is the basis of shared decision making.
Patient Educ Couns. 2023 Jun;111:107681. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2023.107681. Epub 2023 Feb 24.
4
Understanding the experiences and perspectives of prenatal screening among a diverse cohort.
Prenat Diagn. 2023 May;43(5):605-612. doi: 10.1002/pd.6297. Epub 2023 Jan 6.
5
Recommendations to improve the patient experience and avoid bias when prenatal screening/testing.
Disabil Health J. 2023 Apr;16(2):101401. doi: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2022.101401. Epub 2022 Nov 5.
6
Mapping out epistemic justice in the clinical space: using narrative techniques to affirm patients as knowers.
Philos Ethics Humanit Med. 2021 Oct 26;16(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s13010-021-00110-0.
7
Questioning Biomedicine's Privileging of Disease and Measurability.
AMA J Ethics. 2021 Jul 1;23(7):E537-541. doi: 10.1001/amajethics.2021.537.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验