成人发病神经退行性疾病的产前诊断检测。

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Prenatal Diagnosis Pub Date : 2025-05-24 DOI:10.1002/pd.6826
Maya Rawal, Stephanie Galloway, Michelle E Florido, Amanda L Bergner, Ronald Wapner, Jill S Goldman
{"title":"成人发病神经退行性疾病的产前诊断检测。","authors":"Maya Rawal, Stephanie Galloway, Michelle E Florido, Amanda L Bergner, Ronald Wapner, Jill S Goldman","doi":"10.1002/pd.6826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study investigated existing practices and institutional guidelines on prenatal diagnostic testing (PND) for adult-onset neurodegenerative disease (AOND) to identify points of consensus, disparities, and areas of need in healthcare settings across the United States (US) to better understand if national guidelines are needed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A questionnaire about institutional practices and guidelines on PND for AOND was distributed through the National Society of Genetic Counselors, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and Huntington's Disease Society of America Centers of Excellence. Of 104 responses, 50 met eligibility criteria and were analyzed for commonalities and shared themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of those who provided responses, 80% reported that their institution does not have a formal protocol or written guidelines on PND for AOND. Challenges to PND for AOND included ethical decision making after a positive genetic result, double disclosure of fetal and parental status, and differing values among relevant stakeholders. Of those who provided responses, 100% indicated that national guidelines would be beneficial.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study helps establish the need for national guidelines on PND for AOND given that most institutions surveyed do not have standardized protocols. Points of consensus and shared areas of uncertainty may serve as starting points for the formation of national practice guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":20387,"journal":{"name":"Prenatal Diagnosis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prenatal Diagnostic Testing for Adult-Onset Neurodegenerative Disease.\",\"authors\":\"Maya Rawal, Stephanie Galloway, Michelle E Florido, Amanda L Bergner, Ronald Wapner, Jill S Goldman\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pd.6826\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study investigated existing practices and institutional guidelines on prenatal diagnostic testing (PND) for adult-onset neurodegenerative disease (AOND) to identify points of consensus, disparities, and areas of need in healthcare settings across the United States (US) to better understand if national guidelines are needed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A questionnaire about institutional practices and guidelines on PND for AOND was distributed through the National Society of Genetic Counselors, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and Huntington's Disease Society of America Centers of Excellence. Of 104 responses, 50 met eligibility criteria and were analyzed for commonalities and shared themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of those who provided responses, 80% reported that their institution does not have a formal protocol or written guidelines on PND for AOND. Challenges to PND for AOND included ethical decision making after a positive genetic result, double disclosure of fetal and parental status, and differing values among relevant stakeholders. Of those who provided responses, 100% indicated that national guidelines would be beneficial.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study helps establish the need for national guidelines on PND for AOND given that most institutions surveyed do not have standardized protocols. Points of consensus and shared areas of uncertainty may serve as starting points for the formation of national practice guidelines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20387,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Prenatal Diagnosis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Prenatal Diagnosis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6826\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prenatal Diagnosis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6826","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究调查了成人发病神经退行性疾病(AOND)产前诊断检测(PND)的现有实践和制度指南,以确定美国医疗保健机构的共识点、差异和需求领域,以更好地了解是否需要国家指南。方法:通过美国国家遗传咨询师学会、母胎医学学会和美国亨廷顿病学会卓越中心对AOND的机构实践和PND指南进行问卷调查。在104份回复中,有50份符合资格标准,并分析了共性和共同主题。结果:在提供回复的人中,80%的人报告说他们的机构没有关于AOND的PND的正式协议或书面指南。AOND的PND面临的挑战包括遗传结果阳性后的道德决策,胎儿和父母身份的双重披露,以及相关利益相关者之间的价值观差异。在提供答复的人中,100%的人表示国家指南将是有益的。结论:鉴于大多数接受调查的机构没有标准化的协议,本研究有助于确定AOND的PND国家指南的必要性。共识点和共同的不确定领域可作为制定国家实践准则的起点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prenatal Diagnostic Testing for Adult-Onset Neurodegenerative Disease.

Objective: This study investigated existing practices and institutional guidelines on prenatal diagnostic testing (PND) for adult-onset neurodegenerative disease (AOND) to identify points of consensus, disparities, and areas of need in healthcare settings across the United States (US) to better understand if national guidelines are needed.

Methods: A questionnaire about institutional practices and guidelines on PND for AOND was distributed through the National Society of Genetic Counselors, Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, and Huntington's Disease Society of America Centers of Excellence. Of 104 responses, 50 met eligibility criteria and were analyzed for commonalities and shared themes.

Results: Of those who provided responses, 80% reported that their institution does not have a formal protocol or written guidelines on PND for AOND. Challenges to PND for AOND included ethical decision making after a positive genetic result, double disclosure of fetal and parental status, and differing values among relevant stakeholders. Of those who provided responses, 100% indicated that national guidelines would be beneficial.

Conclusion: This study helps establish the need for national guidelines on PND for AOND given that most institutions surveyed do not have standardized protocols. Points of consensus and shared areas of uncertainty may serve as starting points for the formation of national practice guidelines.

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
Prenatal Diagnosis
Prenatal Diagnosis 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
13.30%
发文量
204
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Prenatal Diagnosis welcomes submissions in all aspects of prenatal diagnosis with a particular focus on areas in which molecular biology and genetics interface with prenatal care and therapy, encompassing: all aspects of fetal imaging, including sonography and magnetic resonance imaging; prenatal cytogenetics, including molecular studies and array CGH; prenatal screening studies; fetal cells and cell-free nucleic acids in maternal blood and other fluids; preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD); prenatal diagnosis of single gene disorders, including metabolic disorders; fetal therapy; fetal and placental development and pathology; development and evaluation of laboratory services for prenatal diagnosis; psychosocial, legal, ethical and economic aspects of prenatal diagnosis; prenatal genetic counseling
×
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