دورية أكاديمية
Genetic screening in a university clinic: impact of primary language.
| العنوان: | Genetic screening in a university clinic: impact of primary language. |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Hawk AF; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22908-0760, USA. adh3y@virginia.edu, Pastore L, Saller DN |
| المصدر: | Prenatal diagnosis [Prenat Diagn] 2011 Sep; Vol. 31 (9), pp. 846-52. Date of Electronic Publication: 2011 Jun 27. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article |
| اللغة: | English |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Wiley Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 8106540 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1097-0223 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 01973851 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Prenat Diagn Subsets: MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Original Publication: Chichester, [Sussex]; New York : Wiley, c1981- |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Genetic Testing* , Language*, Academic Medical Centers ; Adult ; Anxiety ; Down Syndrome/diagnosis ; Female ; Genetic Counseling ; Gestational Age ; Hispanic or Latino ; Humans ; Pregnancy ; Prenatal Diagnosis/psychology ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Virginia |
| مستخلص: | Objective: To contrast Spanish-speaking (S) with English-speaking (E) obstetric patients regarding utilization of genetic screening, motivation for undergoing/declining screening, pregnancy-related anxiety, knowledge about genetic conditions, and printed information as an adjunct to counseling. Method: Paper surveys were given to patients (n = 121) in an academic OB/GYN clinic or placed in charts (n = 271) over a 4-week period. Comparisons were evaluated with Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. Results: Completed surveys were returned from 245 gravidas (response rate 63%, S 48%, and E 67%). Uptake of genetic screening was similar between the groups (S 69% vs. E 57%, p = 0.13). No significant differences were noted in patients' motivation regarding screening, source of screening information, or self-assessed pregnancy-related anxiety. Familiarity of genetic disorders other than Down syndrome differed between the S and E groups (p < 0.003). Perceived positive utility of printed information differed significantly when groups were analyzed by language (S 85% vs. E 47%, p < 0.001) and by uptake of screening(screened 62% vs. not screened 44%, p = 0.006). Conclusion: A majority of study participants (n = 147, 60%) chose genetic screening; uptake and motivation were similar across language groups. Familiarity with genetic conditions was deficient and screening terminology confusing regardless of primary language. The perceived positive utility of printed information (S > E) highlights the importance of clear and early counseling. (Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.) |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20110628 Date Completed: 20140121 Latest Revision: 20211203 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20221213 |
| DOI: | 10.1002/pd.2785 |
| PMID: | 21706503 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
Full Text Finder | تدمد: | 1097-0223 |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1002/pd.2785 |