The Integration of Noninvasive Prenatal Screening into the Existing Prenatal Paradigm: a Survey of Current Genetic Counseling Practice

• Published in: Journal of genetic counseling 2016-10, Vol.25 (5), p.1032-1043
• Main Authors: Suskin, Emily, Hercher, Laura, Aaron, Kathleen Erskine, Bajaj, Komal
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aneuploidy; Antenatal; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Biomedicine; Cell‐free DNA; Clinical Psychology; Counseling; Counselors; Ethics; Female; Fetus; Fetuses; Genetic Counseling; Genetic testing; Genetic Testing - utilization; Gynecology; High risk; Human Genetics; Humans; Integration; Medical screening; Noninvasive prenatal screening; Non‐invasive prenatal testing; Original Research; Pregnancy; Prenatal care; Prenatal Diagnosis - methods; Prenatal screening; Public Health; Serum; Surveys and Questionnaires; Technology; Training; Women
• ISSN: 1059-7700; 1573-3599
• DOI: 10.1007/s10897-016-9934-0

Since its introduction four years ago, noninvasive prenatal screening for fetal aneuploidy (NIPS) has been widely adopted as a screening tool for women at a high risk for fetal aneuploidy. As use expands into the general population, questions arise concerning the integration of NIPS into preexisting screening paradigms. This study aims to examine the use of NIPS in current practice among prenatal counselors, predominantly in the United States, in order to inform strategies for the optimal use of both new and existing screening techniques. We electronically surveyed 208 members of the National Society of Genetic Counselors to ascertain how NIPS is currently being used. Genetic counselors were also queried as to the advantages and disadvantages of offering NIPS to all patients regardless of a priori risk. Results indicate substantial variation in practice regarding which patients are offered NIPS and how counselors have incorporated this technology into existing screening routines. The majority of participants report offering NIPS in conjunction with another method of screening for fetal aneuploidy, indicating that NIPS is being used as an addition rather than as a replacement. These screening methods primarily include nuchal translucency (NT) (45.1 %, n  = 78) and first trimester serum screening, with or without an NT (19.7 %, n  = 34). Furthermore, the majority report that they would be concerned about losing the clinical value of an NT in a complete transition to NIPS (85.4 %, n  = 164). Counselors are evenly split on the merits of expanding the use of NIPS to the general population (con: 55.3 %, n  = 105; pro: 44.7 %, n  = 85). The lack of consensus suggests that updated practice guidelines might benefit counselors. In addition, respondents emphasized the need to better educate patients and providers about the risks, benefits, and limitations of the test.