“筛查不应基于支付能力”:澳大利亚医疗保健提供者和消费者对非侵入性产前检测公共资金的看法。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Cecilia Pynaker, Molly Johnston, Catherine Mills, Katie Vasey, Michelle Taylor-Sands, Hilary Bowman-Smart, Lisa Hui
{"title":"“筛查不应基于支付能力”:澳大利亚医疗保健提供者和消费者对非侵入性产前检测公共资金的看法。","authors":"Cecilia Pynaker, Molly Johnston, Catherine Mills, Katie Vasey, Michelle Taylor-Sands, Hilary Bowman-Smart, Lisa Hui","doi":"10.1111/ajo.13915","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) does not receive any Medicare rebate. This study investigated the views of Australian healthcare providers and consumers on public funding of NIPT.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Two anonymous online, cross-sectional surveys were conducted from September 2022 to January 2023. Surveys targeted maternity healthcare professionals ('providers'), and individuals who had recently conceived a pregnancy ('consumers'). Quantitative data were analysed using χ<sup>2</sup> test. Free-text responses were analysed by inductive content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Responses from 381 providers and 630 consumers were analysed. The overwhelming majority of providers (96.8%) identified financial cost as a consumer barrier to NIPT access. Public funding for NIPT was supported by 86.4% of providers and 90.4% of consumers, with free-text responses citing equity, clinical, health economic, reproductive autonomy, and ethical justifications. Of the 145 consumers who did not use NIPT in a recent pregnancy, 63.1% rated cost as an 'important/very important' factor in foregoing NIPT. NIPT non-users were younger, had lower household income and education, and were more likely to live in a rural or remote area than consumers who used NIPT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Maternity healthcare providers and consumers are highly supportive of public funding for NIPT as a first-line screening test on clinical, equity, health economic, and ethical grounds. Our results confirm the presence of significant socioeconomic disparities between NIPT users and non-users, with cost being the most important factor impeding equitable access to best practice in prenatal screening. Further research and advocacy are needed to achieve equitable access to best practice in antenatal care.</p>","PeriodicalId":55429,"journal":{"name":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"'Screening should not be based on ability to pay': Australian healthcare providers' and consumers' perspectives on public funding for non-invasive prenatal testing.\",\"authors\":\"Cecilia Pynaker, Molly Johnston, Catherine Mills, Katie Vasey, Michelle Taylor-Sands, Hilary Bowman-Smart, Lisa Hui\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajo.13915\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) does not receive any Medicare rebate. This study investigated the views of Australian healthcare providers and consumers on public funding of NIPT.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Two anonymous online, cross-sectional surveys were conducted from September 2022 to January 2023. Surveys targeted maternity healthcare professionals ('providers'), and individuals who had recently conceived a pregnancy ('consumers'). Quantitative data were analysed using χ<sup>2</sup> test. Free-text responses were analysed by inductive content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Responses from 381 providers and 630 consumers were analysed. The overwhelming majority of providers (96.8%) identified financial cost as a consumer barrier to NIPT access. Public funding for NIPT was supported by 86.4% of providers and 90.4% of consumers, with free-text responses citing equity, clinical, health economic, reproductive autonomy, and ethical justifications. Of the 145 consumers who did not use NIPT in a recent pregnancy, 63.1% rated cost as an 'important/very important' factor in foregoing NIPT. NIPT non-users were younger, had lower household income and education, and were more likely to live in a rural or remote area than consumers who used NIPT.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Maternity healthcare providers and consumers are highly supportive of public funding for NIPT as a first-line screening test on clinical, equity, health economic, and ethical grounds. Our results confirm the presence of significant socioeconomic disparities between NIPT users and non-users, with cost being the most important factor impeding equitable access to best practice in prenatal screening. Further research and advocacy are needed to achieve equitable access to best practice in antenatal care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55429,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13915\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13915","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:无创产前检查(NIPT)不接受任何医疗保险回扣。本研究调查了澳大利亚医疗保健提供者和消费者对NIPT公共资金的看法。材料和方法:从2022年9月到2023年1月进行了两次匿名的在线横断面调查。调查的对象是产妇保健专业人员(“提供者”)和最近怀孕的个人(“消费者”)。定量资料采用χ2检验。采用归纳内容分析法对自由文本回复进行分析。结果:对381家供应商和630名消费者的反馈进行了分析。绝大多数供应商(96.8%)认为财务成本是消费者使用NIPT的障碍。对NIPT的公共资助得到了86.4%的提供者和90.4%的消费者的支持,自由文本回应引用了公平、临床、健康经济、生殖自主和道德理由。在145名最近怀孕期间没有使用NIPT的消费者中,63.1%的人认为成本是放弃NIPT的“重要/非常重要”因素。与使用NIPT的消费者相比,不使用NIPT的人更年轻,家庭收入和教育程度较低,更有可能生活在农村或偏远地区。结论:从临床、公平、卫生经济和伦理角度考虑,产妇保健提供者和消费者高度支持为NIPT提供公共资金作为一线筛查试验。我们的研究结果证实了NIPT使用者和非使用者之间存在显著的社会经济差异,成本是阻碍公平获得产前筛查最佳实践的最重要因素。需要进一步的研究和宣传,以实现公平获得产前保健最佳做法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
'Screening should not be based on ability to pay': Australian healthcare providers' and consumers' perspectives on public funding for non-invasive prenatal testing.

Background: Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) does not receive any Medicare rebate. This study investigated the views of Australian healthcare providers and consumers on public funding of NIPT.

Materials and methods: Two anonymous online, cross-sectional surveys were conducted from September 2022 to January 2023. Surveys targeted maternity healthcare professionals ('providers'), and individuals who had recently conceived a pregnancy ('consumers'). Quantitative data were analysed using χ2 test. Free-text responses were analysed by inductive content analysis.

Results: Responses from 381 providers and 630 consumers were analysed. The overwhelming majority of providers (96.8%) identified financial cost as a consumer barrier to NIPT access. Public funding for NIPT was supported by 86.4% of providers and 90.4% of consumers, with free-text responses citing equity, clinical, health economic, reproductive autonomy, and ethical justifications. Of the 145 consumers who did not use NIPT in a recent pregnancy, 63.1% rated cost as an 'important/very important' factor in foregoing NIPT. NIPT non-users were younger, had lower household income and education, and were more likely to live in a rural or remote area than consumers who used NIPT.

Conclusion: Maternity healthcare providers and consumers are highly supportive of public funding for NIPT as a first-line screening test on clinical, equity, health economic, and ethical grounds. Our results confirm the presence of significant socioeconomic disparities between NIPT users and non-users, with cost being the most important factor impeding equitable access to best practice in prenatal screening. Further research and advocacy are needed to achieve equitable access to best practice in antenatal care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
165
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (ANZJOG) is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RANZCOG) and the RANZCOG Research foundation. ANZJOG aims to provide a medium for the publication of original contributions to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of obstetrics and gynaecology and related disciplines. Articles are peer reviewed by clinicians or researchers expert in the field of the submitted work. From time to time the journal will also publish printed abstracts from the RANZCOG Annual Scientific Meeting and meetings of relevant special interest groups, where the accepted abstracts have undergone the journals peer review acceptance process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信