2010
DOI: 10.1016/s1701-2163(16)34425-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An Assessment of Women’s Knowledge of and Views on the Reporting of Ultrasound Soft Markers During the Routine Anatomy Ultrasound Examination

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On the contrary, in a prospective Canadian survey of women booked for a (routine) anatomy ultrasound examination in second trimester, only 6% of women were hesitant or clearly did not want to know about soft markers if they were seen. However, 23% of the study participants stated that soft markers should be reported only after the woman has been counselled and given her consent [ 33 ]. Our study, which is the first to report obstetricians’ views on the use of ultrasound, in conjunction with the number of publications that report on women’s limited understanding of the purpose and potential of the scan [ 2 , 13 , 17 ], provides evidence for the utter importance of appropriate counselling prior to the examination.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On the contrary, in a prospective Canadian survey of women booked for a (routine) anatomy ultrasound examination in second trimester, only 6% of women were hesitant or clearly did not want to know about soft markers if they were seen. However, 23% of the study participants stated that soft markers should be reported only after the woman has been counselled and given her consent [ 33 ]. Our study, which is the first to report obstetricians’ views on the use of ultrasound, in conjunction with the number of publications that report on women’s limited understanding of the purpose and potential of the scan [ 2 , 13 , 17 ], provides evidence for the utter importance of appropriate counselling prior to the examination.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In interpreting our findings, contextual understanding of women's experiences is important. Specifically, women in the SS − /US + group may be unprepared to learn about the detection of soft markers, especially if they are approaching the ultrasound simply as a chance “to see the baby.” Not all guidelines include reference to the importance of talking about soft markers during prenatal visits and studies have shown that women often have little knowledge about soft markers prior to their ultrasound . Perhaps the very nature of soft markers (directly observable features) results in their being perceived as more “real,” and producing stronger negative emotional reactions than serum screen results, which are perhaps less tangible.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The majority of prospective parents consider the examination as routine prenatal care rather than a medical examination for birth defects (Ekelin et al 2004). Usually, they are not aware that the examination is a means of prenatal screening for aneuploidy (Cash et al 2010) and do not know what could be found during the ultrasound examination, or the significance of an observed marker. Couples, who receive an ultrasound report indicating the presence of soft markers, often feel both worried and confused, and many consider the information provided prior to the screening to be insufficient (Ahman et al 2010;Green et al 2004;Larsson et al 2009).…”
Section: Introduction Ultrasound and Genetic Soft Markersmentioning
confidence: 99%