Impact of first-trimester anomaly scan on health-related quality of life and healthcare costs: a scoping review

References

• Karim JN, Roberts NW, Salomon LJ, et al. Systematic review of first-trimester ultrasound screening for detection of fetal structural anomalies and factors that affect screening performance. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017;50(4):1–11. doi:10.1002/uog.17246
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haraldstad K, Wahl A, Andenæs R, et al. A systematic ­review of quality of life research in medicine and health sciences. Qual Life Res. 2019;28(10):2641–2650. doi:10.1007/s11136-019-02214-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gregory MRB, Prouhet PM, Russell CL, et al. Quality of life for parents of children with congenital heart defect: a systematic review. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2018;33(4):363–371. doi:10.1097/JCN.0000000000000466
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–473. doi:10.7326/M18-0850
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison LP, Jr., Pauly MV, Willke RJ, et al. An overview of value, perspective, and decision Context-A health economics approach: an ISPOR special task force report [2]. Value Health. 2018;21(2):124–130. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bardi F, Bakker M, Kenkhuis MJA, et al. Psychological outcomes, knowledge and preferences of pregnant women on first-trimester screening for fetal structural abnormalities: a prospective cohort study. PLoS One. 2021;16(1):e0245938. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0245938
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck V, Opdekamp S, Enzlin P, et al. Psychosocial aspects of invasive fetal therapy as compared to prenatal diagnosis and risk assessment. Prenat Diagn. 2013;33(4):334–340. doi:10.1002/pd.4073
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brondino N, Colombini G, Morandotti N, et al. Psychological correlates of decision-making during prenatal diagnosis: a prospective study. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;34(2):68–74. doi:10.3109/0167482X.2013.797404
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chueh HY, Cheng PJ, Shaw SW, et al. Maternal anxiety about first trimester nuchal translucency screening and impact of positive screening results. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007;86(12):1437–1441. doi:10.1080/00016340701622724
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Georgsson Ohman S, Saltvedt S, Grunewald C, et al. Does fetal screening affect women’s worries about the health of their baby? A randomized controlled trial of ultrasound screening for down’s syndrome versus routine ­ultrasound screening. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2004; 83(7):634–640. doi:10.1111/j.0001-6349.2004.00462.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kowalcek I, Huber G, Bieniakiewitz I, et al. The influence of gestational age on depressive reactions, stress and anxiety of pregnant women and their partners in relation to prenatal diagnosis. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2003;24(4):239–245. doi:10.3109/01674820309074688
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leithner K, Maar A, Fischer-Kern M, et al. Affective state of women following a prenatal diagnosis: predictors of a negative psychological outcome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2004;23(3):240–246. doi:10.1002/uog.978
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simó S, Zúñiga L, Izquierdo MT, et al. Effects of ultrasound on anxiety and psychosocial adaptation to pregnancy. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2019;22(4):511–518. doi:10.1007/s00737-018-0918-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinans MJN, Kooij L, Müller MA, et al. A comparison of the impact of screen-positive results obtained from ultrasound and biochemical screening for down syndrome in the first trimester: a pilot study. Prenat Diagn. 2004;24(5):347–351. doi:10.1002/pd.872
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaasen A, Helbig A, Malt UF, et al. Acute maternal social dysfunction, health perception and psychological distress after ultrasonographic detection of a fetal structural anomaly. BJOG. 2010;117(9):1127–1138. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2010.02622.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kowalcek I, Mühlhoff A, Bachmann S, et al. Depressive reactions and stress related to prenatal medicine procedures. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2002;19(1):18–23. doi:10.1046/j.0960-7692.2001.00551.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCoyd JL. Preparation for prenatal decision-making: a baseline of knowledge and reflection in women participating in prenatal screening. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;34(1):3–8. doi:10.3109/0167482X.2012.757590
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drysdale K, Ridley D, Walker K, et al. First-trimester pregnancy scanning as a screening tool for high-risk and abnormal pregnancies in a district, general hospital setting. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2002;22(2):159–165. doi:10.1080/01443610120113300
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Whitlow BJ, Chatzipapas IK, Lazanakis ML, et al. The value of sonography in early pregnancy for the detection of fetal abnormalities in an unselected population. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;106(9):929–936. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.1999.tb08432.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roberts T, Mugford M, Piercy J. Choosing options for ultrasound screening in pregnancy and comparing cost effectiveness: a decision analysis approach. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998;105(9):960–970. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.1998.tb10258.x
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ritchie K, Bradbury I, Slattery J, et al. Economic modelling of antenatal screening and ultrasound scanning programmes for identification of fetal abnormalities. BJOG. 2005;112(7):866–874. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00560.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murray D, Cox JL. Screening for depression during pregnancy with the edinburgh depression scale (EDDS). J Reprod Infant Psychol. 1990;8(2):99–107. 1990/04/01doi:10.1080/02646839008403615
   Google Scholar
• van der Bij AK, de Weerd S, Cikot RJ, et al. Validation of the dutch short form of the state scale of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: considerations for usage in screening outcomes. Community Genet. 2003;6(2):84–87. doi:10.1159/000073003
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Karim JN, Bradburn E, Roberts N, study A., et al. First-trimester ultrasound detection of fetal heart anomalies: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2022;59(1):11–25. doi:10.1002/uog.23740
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ekelin M, Crang Svalenius E, Larsson AK, et al. Parental expectations, experiences and reactions, sense of coherence and grade of anxiety related to routine ultrasound examination with normal findings during pregnancy. Prenat Diagn. 2009;29(10):952–959. doi:10.1002/pd.2324
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Schendel RV, Page-Christiaens G, Beulen L, et al. Women’s experience with non-invasive prenatal testing and emotional well-being and satisfaction after test-results. J Genet Couns. 2017;26(6):1348–1356. doi:10.1007/s10897-017-0118-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korenromp MJ, Christiaens GC, van den Bout J, et al. Long-term psychological consequences of pregnancy termination for fetal abnormality: a cross-sectional study. Prenat Diagn. 2005;25(3):253–260. doi:10.1002/pd.1127
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korenromp MJ, Page-Christiaens GC, van den Bout J, et al. A prospective study on parental coping 4 months after termination of pregnancy for fetal anomalies. Prenat Diagn. 2007;27(8):709–716. doi:10.1002/pd.1763
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alhusen JL. A literature update on maternal-fetal attachment. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs. 2008;37(3):315–328. doi:10.1111/j.1552-6909.2008.00241.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salisbury A, Law K, LaGasse L, et al. Maternal-fetal attachment. JAMA. 2003;289(13):1701. doi:10.1001/jama.289.13.1701
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ammon Avalos L, Galindo C, Li DK. A systematic review to calculate background miscarriage rates using life table analysis. Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2012; 94(6):417–423. doi:10.1002/bdra.23014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cullen MT, Green JJ, Reece EA, et al. A comparison of transvaginal and abdominal ultrasound in visualizing the first trimester conceptus. J Ultrasound Med. 1989; 8(10):565–569. doi:10.7863/jum.1989.8.10.565
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prieto L, Sacristán JA. Problems and solutions in calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1(1):80. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-1-80
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Phelps CE. A new method to determine the optimal willingness to pay in cost-effectiveness analysis. Value Health. 2019;22(7):785–791. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2019.03.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berwick DM, Weinstein MC. What do patients value? Willingness to pay for ultrasound in normal pregnancy. Med Care. 1985;23(7):881–893. doi:10.1097/00005650-198507000-00005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verweij EJ, Oepkes D, de Vries M, et al. Non-invasive prenatal screening for trisomy 21: what women want and are willing to pay. Patient Educ Couns. 2013; 93(3):641–645. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2013.08.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar