Decision-Making after Ultrasound Diagnosis of Fetal Abnormality

References

• J Petrini, K Damus, R Russell. Contribution of birth defects to infant mortality in the United States. Teratology. 66(Suppl 1): 2002; S3–S6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• K Lee, B Khoshnood, L Chen. Infant mortality from congenital malformations in the United States, 1970–1997. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 98: 2001; 620–627.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• F Lys, P De Wals, I Borlee-Grimee. Evaluation of routine ultrasound examination for the prenatal diagnosis of malformation. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 30: 1989; 101–109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S Levi. Ultrasound in prenatal diagnosis: polemics around routine ultrasound screening for second trimester fetal malformations. Prenatal Diagnosis. 22: 2002; 285–295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JM Carrera, M Torrents, C Mortera. Routine prenatal ultrasound screening for fetal abnormalities: 22 years' experience. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 5: 1995; 174–179.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PA Boyd, P Chamberlain, NR Hicks. 6-year experience of prenatal diagnosis in an unselected population in Oxford, UK. Lancet. 352: 1998; 1577–1581.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JW Wladimiroff, TE Cohen-Overbeek, NT Ursem. Geavanceerd ultrageluidonderzoek naar aangeboren afwijkingen in Rotterdam; 20 jaar ervaring. [Twenty years of experience in advanced ultrasound scanning for fetal abnormalities in Rotterdam]. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde. 147: 2003; 2106–2110.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• A Tabor, M Zdravkovic, A Perslev. Screening for congenital malformations by ultrasonography in the general population of pregnant women: factors affecting the efficacy. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 82: 2003; 1092–1098.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MB McNay, JE Fleming. Forty years of obstetric ultrasound 1957–1997: from A-scope to three dimensions. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. 25: 1999; 3–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PS Romano, NJ Waitzman. Can decision analysis help us decide whether ultrasound screening for fetal abnormalities is worth it?. Annals of the New York Academy of Science. 847: 1998; 154–172.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Health Council of the Netherlands. Prenatal Screening: Down's syndrome, neural tube defects, routine-ultrasonography. No.2001/11. 2001; Health Council of the Netherlands: Den Haag.
   Google Scholar
• H Grandjean, D Larroque, S Levi. Sensitivity of routine ultrasound screening of pregnancies in the Eurofetus database. The Eurofetus Team. Annals of the New York Academy of Science. 847: 1998; 118–124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JW Wladimiroff. Routine ultrasonography for the detection of fetal structural anomalies. HIJ Wildschut, CP Weiner, TJ Peters. When to Screen in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2nd ed., 2006; WB Saunders: Philadelphia, 244–252.
   Google Scholar
• L Getz, AL Kirkengen. Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: advancing technology, soft markers for fetal chromosomal aberrations, and unacknowledged ethical dilemmas. Social Sciences and Medicine. 56: 2003; 2045–2057.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HIJ Wildschut, P ten Hoope-Bender, M Borkent-Polet. Practice variation of test procedures reportedly used in routine antenatal care in the Netherlands. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 78: 1999; 27–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JE Puddifoot, MP Johnson. The legitimacy of grieving: the partner's experience at miscarriage. Social Science and Medicine. 45: 1997; 837–845.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• I Kowalcek, G Huber, I Bieniakiewitz. The influence of gestational age on depressive reactions, stress and anxiety of pregnant women and their partners in relation to prenatal diagnosis. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 24: 2003; 239–245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L Bricker, J Garcia, J Henderson. Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: a systematic review of the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and women's views. Health Technology Assessment. 4: 2000. i-vi/1–193.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• G Harris, L Connor, A Bisits. “Seeing the baby”: pleasures and dilemmas of ultrasound technologies for primiparous Australian women. Medical Anthropology Quarterly. 18: 2004; 23–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AE Reading, DN Cox. The effects of ultrasound examination on maternal anxiety levels. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 5: 1982; 237–247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M Sklansky, A Tang, D Levy. Maternal psychological impact of fetal echocardiography. Journal of American Society of Echocardiography. 15: 2002; 159–166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CE Harris. Aborting abnormal fetuses: the parental perspective. Journal of Applied Philosophy. 8: 1991; 57–68.
   Google Scholar
• G Bjorkhem, C Jorgensen, K Hanseus. Parental reactions to fetal echocardiography. Journal of Maternal and Fetal Medicine. 6: 1997; 87–92.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Z Zlotogorski, O Tadmor, E Duniec. The effect of the amount of feedback on anxiety levels during ultrasound scanning. Journal of Clinical Ultrasound. 24: 1996; 21–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• T Larsen, TH Nguyen, M Munk. Ultrasound screening in the 2nd trimester. The pregnant woman's background knowledge, expectations, experiences and acceptances. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 15: 2002; 383–386.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E Georges. Fetal ultrasound imaging and the production of authoritative knowledge in Greece. Medical Anthropology Quarterly. 10: 1996; 157–175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J Garcia, L Bricker, J Henderson. Women's views of pregnancy ultrasound: a systematic review. Birth. 29: 2002; 225–250.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H Statham, W Solomou, L Chitty. Prenatal diagnosis of fetal abnormality: psychological effects on women in low-risk pregnancies. Baillières Best Practice and Research in Clinical Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 14: 2000; 731–747.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JJ Detraux, F Gillot-de Vries, S Vanden Eynde. Psychological impact of the announcement of a fetal abnormality on pregnant women and on professionals. Annals of the New York Academy of Science. 847: 1998; 210–219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JA Hunfeld, JW Wladimiroff, J Passchier. Emotional reactions in women in late pregnancy (24 weeks or longer) following the ultrasound diagnosis of a severe or lethal fetal malformation. Prenatal Diagnosis. 13: 1993; 603–612.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M Langer, M Ringler. Prospective counselling after prenatal diagnosis of fetal malformations: interventions and parental reactions. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 68: 1989; 323–329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SR Leuthner, M Bolger, M Frommelt. The impact of abnormal fetal echocardiography on expectant parents' experience of pregnancy: a pilot study. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 24: 2003; 121–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LM Mitchell. Women's experiences of unexpected ultrasound findings. Journal of Midwifery and Women's Health. 49: 2004; 228–234.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DW Britt, ST Risinger, MK Mans. Devastation and relief: conflicting meanings of detected fetal abnormalities. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 20: 2002; 1–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JH Groenewoud. End-of-life-decisions in medicine, empirical studies on practices and attitudes in the Netherlands. 2002; Erasmus University Medical Centre Rotterdam: Rotterdam.
   Google Scholar
• FA Chervenak, LB McCullough. Nonaggressive obstetric management. An option for some fetal abnormalities during the third trimester. JAMA. 261: 1989; 3439–3440.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FA Chervenak, LB McCullough, D Skupski. Ethical issues in the management of pregnancies complicated by fetal abnormalities. Obstetrical and Gynecological Survey. 58: 2003; 473–483.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P Kirkinen, P Jouppila, R Herva. Fatal fetal abnormalities. Route of delivery and effect of the development of antepartum diagnostics in the last 13 years. Journal of Reproductive Medicine. 37: 1992; 645–668.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JA Spinnato, VD Cook, CR Cook. Aggressive intrapartum management of lethal fetal abnormalities: beyond fetal beneficence. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 85: 1995; 89–92.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S Campbell, FD Johnstone, EM Holt. Anencephaly: early ultrasonic diagnosis and active management. Lancet. 2: 1972; 1226–1227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MC White-Van Mourik, JM Connor. The psychosocial sequelae of a second trimester termination of pregnancy for fetal abnormality over a two year period. Birth Defects Original Article Series. 28: 1992; 61–74.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• MC White-Van Mourik, JM Connor, MA Ferguson-Smith. Patient care before and after termination of pregnancy for neural tube defects. Prenatal Diagnosis. 10: 1990; 497–505.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TM Crombleholme, M D'Alton, M Cendron. Prenatal diagnosis and the pediatric surgeon: the impact of prenatal consultation on perinatal management. Journal of Pediatric Surgery. 31: 1996; 156–162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FI Luks, SR Carr, LR Feit. Experience with a multidisciplinary antenatal diagnosis and management model in fetal medicine. Journal of Maternal Fetal and Neonatal Medicine. 14: 2003; 333–337.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• L Aite, A Trucchi, A Nahom. Multidisciplinary management of fetal surgical abnormalities: the impact on maternal anxiety. European Journal of Pediatric Surgery. 12: 2002; 90–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J Kemp, M Davenport, A Pernet. Antenatally diagnosed surgical abnormalities: the psychological effect of parental antenatal counseling. Journal of Pediatric Surgery. 33: 1998; 1376–1379.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MS Scher, BM Kidder, D Shah. Pediatric neurology participation in a fetal diagnostic service. Pediatric Neurology. 30: 2004; 338–344.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M Sandelowski, LC Jones. Healing fictions: stories of choosing in the aftermath of the detection of fetal abnormalities. Social Science and Medicine. 42: 1996; 353–361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JM Bosma, G van der Wal, SL Hosman-Benjaminse. Late zwangerschapsafbreking in Noord-Holland. II Zorgvuldigheid vooraf en toetsing achteraf [Late pregnancy interruption in Noord-Holland. II. Carefulness before and review afterwards]. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde. 140: 1996; 605–609.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Late zwangerschapsafbreking: zorgvuldigheid en toetsing. [Late termination of pregnancy: care and assessment]. 1998; Netherlands Ministry of Health/Ministry of Justice: Rijswijk.
   Google Scholar
• Nederlandse Vereniging voor Obstetrie en Gynaecologie. Model Reglement Medisch Handelen Late Zwangerschapsafbreking bij niet met het leven verenigbare afwijkingen vallend onder categorie 1; versie dd 221003. 2003.
   Google Scholar
• C Grevengood, LP Shulman, JS Dungan. Severity of abnormality influences decision to terminate pregnancies affected with fetal neural tube defects. Fetal Diagnosis and Therapy. 9: 1994; 273–277.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PG Pryde, NB Isada, M Hallak. Determinants of parental decision to abort or continue after non-aneuploid ultrasound-detected fetal abnormalities. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 80: 1992; 52–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• E Sheiner, I Shoham-Vardi, D Weitzman. Decisions regarding pregnancy termination among Bedouin couples referred to third level ultrasound clinic. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 76: 1998; 141–146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KB Schechtman, DL Gray, JD Baty. Decision-making for termination of pregnancies with fetal abnormalities: analysis of 53,000 pregnancies. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 99: 2002; 216–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar