The Case for Universal Prenatal Genetic Counseling
Recent scientific advances in human genetics and prenatal diagnostic technologies challenge the counseling infrastructure of most obstetric services. In just the past several years, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has published guidelines on fragile X, spinal muscular atrophy...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) 2014-06, Vol.123 (6), p.1335-1338 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1338 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1335 |
container_title | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953) |
container_volume | 123 |
creator | Minkoff, Howard Berkowitz, Richard |
description | Recent scientific advances in human genetics and prenatal diagnostic technologies challenge the counseling infrastructure of most obstetric services. In just the past several years, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has published guidelines on fragile X, spinal muscular atrophy, and cystic fibrosis screening, and new technologies including microarray analysis, cell-free fetal DNA, and carrier gene panels have become available. Obstetrics is at a crossroads, which requires consideration of new ways of providing genetic counseling. Currently a two-tiered process is used. Specific tests such as first- or second-trimester screening for aneuploidy are offered to virtually all women by a clinician who provides counseling and who may offer additional tests to patients in particular ethnic groups and those with unique obstetric or family histories. Frequently only this latter group and those who “screen positive” on the universally offered tests are sent to a genetic counselor. This approach worked well when screening focused on a relatively small number of diagnoses, but that is no longer the case. We argue that obstetricians, who were able to maintain mastery over the content of counseling when aneuploidies and karyotype analysis were the essential diagnoses and diagnostic tools available, are rarely able to offer the same level of expertise regarding the chromosomal, genomic, and genetic diseases now diagnosable and the newest available diagnostic methodologies. Therefore, all women, not just those surpassing some poorly defined level of risk, deserve genetic counseling. Approaches for achieving this goal are discussed. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000267 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1528335388</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1528335388</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4017-5140bdc6956940356f0ca4776527821cd89b74d699fce8450bcf840e73b46b8b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE9LwzAYh4Mobk6_gUiPXjrzr0l6lKJTGMzDBt5Cmr511a6dSevw25u5KeJBc0nel-f3CzwInRM8JjiVV9ezyRj_PFTIAzQkSrKYMvZ4iIZhl8ZScT5AJ94_B4aIlB2jAeUKS0bJENH5EqLMeIjK1kWLpnoD500dPThoTBceE2igq2yUtX3joa6ap1N0VJraw9n-HqHF7c08u4uns8l9dj2NLcdExgnhOC-sSBORcswSUWJruJQioVJRYguV5pIXIk1LC4onOLel4hgky7nIVc5G6HLXu3btaw--06vKW6hr00Dbe00SqhhLmFIB5TvUutZ7B6Veu2pl3LsmWG9t6WBL_7YVYhf7H_p8BcV36EtPANQO2LR1F8S81P0GnF6Cqbvlf938j-iWEjTBMcVBkwhT_JljH94Dgwo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1528335388</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Case for Universal Prenatal Genetic Counseling</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload</source><creator>Minkoff, Howard ; Berkowitz, Richard</creator><creatorcontrib>Minkoff, Howard ; Berkowitz, Richard</creatorcontrib><description>Recent scientific advances in human genetics and prenatal diagnostic technologies challenge the counseling infrastructure of most obstetric services. In just the past several years, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has published guidelines on fragile X, spinal muscular atrophy, and cystic fibrosis screening, and new technologies including microarray analysis, cell-free fetal DNA, and carrier gene panels have become available. Obstetrics is at a crossroads, which requires consideration of new ways of providing genetic counseling. Currently a two-tiered process is used. Specific tests such as first- or second-trimester screening for aneuploidy are offered to virtually all women by a clinician who provides counseling and who may offer additional tests to patients in particular ethnic groups and those with unique obstetric or family histories. Frequently only this latter group and those who “screen positive” on the universally offered tests are sent to a genetic counselor. This approach worked well when screening focused on a relatively small number of diagnoses, but that is no longer the case. We argue that obstetricians, who were able to maintain mastery over the content of counseling when aneuploidies and karyotype analysis were the essential diagnoses and diagnostic tools available, are rarely able to offer the same level of expertise regarding the chromosomal, genomic, and genetic diseases now diagnosable and the newest available diagnostic methodologies. Therefore, all women, not just those surpassing some poorly defined level of risk, deserve genetic counseling. Approaches for achieving this goal are discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0029-7844</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-233X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000000267</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24807321</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</publisher><subject>Directive Counseling ; Female ; Genetic Counseling - statistics & numerical data ; Health Services Accessibility - standards ; Humans ; Obstetrics ; Physician's Role ; Risk Assessment</subject><ispartof>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953), 2014-06, Vol.123 (6), p.1335-1338</ispartof><rights>by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>2014 by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4017-5140bdc6956940356f0ca4776527821cd89b74d699fce8450bcf840e73b46b8b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4017-5140bdc6956940356f0ca4776527821cd89b74d699fce8450bcf840e73b46b8b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27907,27908</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24807321$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Minkoff, Howard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berkowitz, Richard</creatorcontrib><title>The Case for Universal Prenatal Genetic Counseling</title><title>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</title><addtitle>Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>Recent scientific advances in human genetics and prenatal diagnostic technologies challenge the counseling infrastructure of most obstetric services. In just the past several years, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has published guidelines on fragile X, spinal muscular atrophy, and cystic fibrosis screening, and new technologies including microarray analysis, cell-free fetal DNA, and carrier gene panels have become available. Obstetrics is at a crossroads, which requires consideration of new ways of providing genetic counseling. Currently a two-tiered process is used. Specific tests such as first- or second-trimester screening for aneuploidy are offered to virtually all women by a clinician who provides counseling and who may offer additional tests to patients in particular ethnic groups and those with unique obstetric or family histories. Frequently only this latter group and those who “screen positive” on the universally offered tests are sent to a genetic counselor. This approach worked well when screening focused on a relatively small number of diagnoses, but that is no longer the case. We argue that obstetricians, who were able to maintain mastery over the content of counseling when aneuploidies and karyotype analysis were the essential diagnoses and diagnostic tools available, are rarely able to offer the same level of expertise regarding the chromosomal, genomic, and genetic diseases now diagnosable and the newest available diagnostic methodologies. Therefore, all women, not just those surpassing some poorly defined level of risk, deserve genetic counseling. Approaches for achieving this goal are discussed.</description><subject>Directive Counseling</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Genetic Counseling - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Health Services Accessibility - standards</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Obstetrics</subject><subject>Physician's Role</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><issn>0029-7844</issn><issn>1873-233X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE9LwzAYh4Mobk6_gUiPXjrzr0l6lKJTGMzDBt5Cmr511a6dSevw25u5KeJBc0nel-f3CzwInRM8JjiVV9ezyRj_PFTIAzQkSrKYMvZ4iIZhl8ZScT5AJ94_B4aIlB2jAeUKS0bJENH5EqLMeIjK1kWLpnoD500dPThoTBceE2igq2yUtX3joa6ap1N0VJraw9n-HqHF7c08u4uns8l9dj2NLcdExgnhOC-sSBORcswSUWJruJQioVJRYguV5pIXIk1LC4onOLel4hgky7nIVc5G6HLXu3btaw--06vKW6hr00Dbe00SqhhLmFIB5TvUutZ7B6Veu2pl3LsmWG9t6WBL_7YVYhf7H_p8BcV36EtPANQO2LR1F8S81P0GnF6Cqbvlf938j-iWEjTBMcVBkwhT_JljH94Dgwo</recordid><startdate>201406</startdate><enddate>201406</enddate><creator>Minkoff, Howard</creator><creator>Berkowitz, Richard</creator><general>by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</general><general>by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201406</creationdate><title>The Case for Universal Prenatal Genetic Counseling</title><author>Minkoff, Howard ; Berkowitz, Richard</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4017-5140bdc6956940356f0ca4776527821cd89b74d699fce8450bcf840e73b46b8b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Directive Counseling</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Genetic Counseling - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Health Services Accessibility - standards</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Obstetrics</topic><topic>Physician's Role</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Minkoff, Howard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berkowitz, Richard</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Minkoff, Howard</au><au>Berkowitz, Richard</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Case for Universal Prenatal Genetic Counseling</atitle><jtitle>Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953)</jtitle><addtitle>Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>2014-06</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>123</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1335</spage><epage>1338</epage><pages>1335-1338</pages><issn>0029-7844</issn><eissn>1873-233X</eissn><abstract>Recent scientific advances in human genetics and prenatal diagnostic technologies challenge the counseling infrastructure of most obstetric services. In just the past several years, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has published guidelines on fragile X, spinal muscular atrophy, and cystic fibrosis screening, and new technologies including microarray analysis, cell-free fetal DNA, and carrier gene panels have become available. Obstetrics is at a crossroads, which requires consideration of new ways of providing genetic counseling. Currently a two-tiered process is used. Specific tests such as first- or second-trimester screening for aneuploidy are offered to virtually all women by a clinician who provides counseling and who may offer additional tests to patients in particular ethnic groups and those with unique obstetric or family histories. Frequently only this latter group and those who “screen positive” on the universally offered tests are sent to a genetic counselor. This approach worked well when screening focused on a relatively small number of diagnoses, but that is no longer the case. We argue that obstetricians, who were able to maintain mastery over the content of counseling when aneuploidies and karyotype analysis were the essential diagnoses and diagnostic tools available, are rarely able to offer the same level of expertise regarding the chromosomal, genomic, and genetic diseases now diagnosable and the newest available diagnostic methodologies. Therefore, all women, not just those surpassing some poorly defined level of risk, deserve genetic counseling. Approaches for achieving this goal are discussed.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>by The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved</pub><pmid>24807321</pmid><doi>10.1097/AOG.0000000000000267</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0029-7844 |
ispartof | Obstetrics and gynecology (New York. 1953), 2014-06, Vol.123 (6), p.1335-1338 |
issn | 0029-7844 1873-233X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1528335388 |
source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Ovid Autoload |
subjects | Directive Counseling Female Genetic Counseling - statistics & numerical data Health Services Accessibility - standards Humans Obstetrics Physician's Role Risk Assessment |
title | The Case for Universal Prenatal Genetic Counseling |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T19%3A01%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Case%20for%20Universal%20Prenatal%20Genetic%20Counseling&rft.jtitle=Obstetrics%20and%20gynecology%20(New%20York.%201953)&rft.au=Minkoff,%20Howard&rft.date=2014-06&rft.volume=123&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1335&rft.epage=1338&rft.pages=1335-1338&rft.issn=0029-7844&rft.eissn=1873-233X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/AOG.0000000000000267&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1528335388%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1528335388&rft_id=info:pmid/24807321&rfr_iscdi=true |