Cargando…

Parents of Newborns in the NICU Enrolled in Genome Sequencing Research: Hopeful, but Not Naïve

PURPOSE: In 2014, our institution launched a randomized control trial (RCT) comparing rapid genome sequencing (GS) to standard clinical evaluations of infants with suspected genetic disorders. This study aimed to understand parental response to the use of GS for their newborn babies. METHODS: 23 of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Berrios, Courtney, Koertje, Catherine, Noel-MacDonnell, Janelle, Soden, Sarah, Lantos, John
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7004847/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31467447
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-019-0644-5
_version_ 1783494812965535744
author Berrios, Courtney
Koertje, Catherine
Noel-MacDonnell, Janelle
Soden, Sarah
Lantos, John
author_facet Berrios, Courtney
Koertje, Catherine
Noel-MacDonnell, Janelle
Soden, Sarah
Lantos, John
author_sort Berrios, Courtney
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: In 2014, our institution launched a randomized control trial (RCT) comparing rapid genome sequencing (GS) to standard clinical evaluations of infants with suspected genetic disorders. This study aimed to understand parental response to the use of GS for their newborn babies. METHODS: 23 of 128 parents whose infant had enrolled in the RCT completed a retrospective survey and interview addressing attitudes about GS and responses to receiving diagnostic information. We also collected information about participants’ genetic literacy, genetic knowledge, numeracy, and symptoms of anxiety and depression. RESULTS: The majority reported positive, 13 (56.5%), or neutral, 4 (17.4%), feelings when approached about GS for their infant and 100% felt that GS was generally beneficial. The 12 participants who had received a unifying diagnosis for their child’s symptoms described personal utility of the information. Some reported the diagnosis led to changes in medical care. Participants showed understanding of some of the psychological risks of GS. For example, 21 (91.3%) agreed or strongly agreed that genetic testing could reveal disturbing results. CONCLUSION: Parents who enrolled their newborn in a RCT of GS demonstrated awareness of a psychological risk, but generally held positive beliefs about GS and perceived the benefits outweighed the risk.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7004847
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70048472020-02-29 Parents of Newborns in the NICU Enrolled in Genome Sequencing Research: Hopeful, but Not Naïve Berrios, Courtney Koertje, Catherine Noel-MacDonnell, Janelle Soden, Sarah Lantos, John Genet Med Article PURPOSE: In 2014, our institution launched a randomized control trial (RCT) comparing rapid genome sequencing (GS) to standard clinical evaluations of infants with suspected genetic disorders. This study aimed to understand parental response to the use of GS for their newborn babies. METHODS: 23 of 128 parents whose infant had enrolled in the RCT completed a retrospective survey and interview addressing attitudes about GS and responses to receiving diagnostic information. We also collected information about participants’ genetic literacy, genetic knowledge, numeracy, and symptoms of anxiety and depression. RESULTS: The majority reported positive, 13 (56.5%), or neutral, 4 (17.4%), feelings when approached about GS for their infant and 100% felt that GS was generally beneficial. The 12 participants who had received a unifying diagnosis for their child’s symptoms described personal utility of the information. Some reported the diagnosis led to changes in medical care. Participants showed understanding of some of the psychological risks of GS. For example, 21 (91.3%) agreed or strongly agreed that genetic testing could reveal disturbing results. CONCLUSION: Parents who enrolled their newborn in a RCT of GS demonstrated awareness of a psychological risk, but generally held positive beliefs about GS and perceived the benefits outweighed the risk. 2019-08-30 2020-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7004847/ /pubmed/31467447 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-019-0644-5 Text en http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use:http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms
spellingShingle Article
Berrios, Courtney
Koertje, Catherine
Noel-MacDonnell, Janelle
Soden, Sarah
Lantos, John
Parents of Newborns in the NICU Enrolled in Genome Sequencing Research: Hopeful, but Not Naïve
title Parents of Newborns in the NICU Enrolled in Genome Sequencing Research: Hopeful, but Not Naïve
title_full Parents of Newborns in the NICU Enrolled in Genome Sequencing Research: Hopeful, but Not Naïve
title_fullStr Parents of Newborns in the NICU Enrolled in Genome Sequencing Research: Hopeful, but Not Naïve
title_full_unstemmed Parents of Newborns in the NICU Enrolled in Genome Sequencing Research: Hopeful, but Not Naïve
title_short Parents of Newborns in the NICU Enrolled in Genome Sequencing Research: Hopeful, but Not Naïve
title_sort parents of newborns in the nicu enrolled in genome sequencing research: hopeful, but not naïve
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7004847/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31467447
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41436-019-0644-5
work_keys_str_mv AT berrioscourtney parentsofnewbornsinthenicuenrolledingenomesequencingresearchhopefulbutnotnaive
AT koertjecatherine parentsofnewbornsinthenicuenrolledingenomesequencingresearchhopefulbutnotnaive
AT noelmacdonnelljanelle parentsofnewbornsinthenicuenrolledingenomesequencingresearchhopefulbutnotnaive
AT sodensarah parentsofnewbornsinthenicuenrolledingenomesequencingresearchhopefulbutnotnaive
AT lantosjohn parentsofnewbornsinthenicuenrolledingenomesequencingresearchhopefulbutnotnaive