Searching for just a few words should be enough to get started. If you need to make more complex queries, use the tips below to guide you.
Article type: Research Article
Authors: Prince, A.a; * | Cruz-Bendezú, A.a | Gunawansa, N.a | Wade, J.a | Coleman-Cowger, V. H.b | Schulkin, J.c | Macri, C. J.d
Affiliations: [a] The George Washington School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, DC, USA | [b] The Emmes Corporation, Rockville, MD, USA | [c] Pregnancy-Related Care Research Network (PRCRN), University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA | [d] Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates, Washington, DC, USA
Correspondence: [*] Address for correspondence: Arianna Prince, BS, George Washington School of Medical and Health Sciences, 2300 I Street NW, Washington, DC 20037, USA. Tel.: +1 917 456 7156; E-mail: aprince14@gwu.edu.
Abstract: BACKGROUND:Genetic screening and testing are technologies historically underutilized in Black populations despite predicting diseases like sickle cell disease (SCD), which is predominantly found in Blacks. We surveyed prenatal patients to understand choices, beliefs and experiences surrounding genetic screening and testing, specifically for SCD. METHODS:In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed 322 women during prenatal visits. Responses were analyzed to identify barriers to care and education about testing and screening for SCD. Patients rated whether they agreed or disagreed with statements regarding sickle cell health behaviors. We used χ2 tests to compare categorical variables by self-reported race. Binary logistic regression was used to determine the odds ratios and confidence intervals for each outcome. RESULTS:Women were a mean (SD) age of 33.3 (6.1). 42.9% of patients self-identified as White while 41.3% of patients self- identified as Black. Screening questions were adjusted for differences in race, insurance, and education levels to show significant differences in responses between Blacks and Whites for screening for SCD (p = 0.047, OR 95% CI = 0.455 [0.210–0.989]) and plans to meet with genetic counselors (p = 0.049, OR 95% CI = 0.299 [0.090–0.993]). The statements “if sickle cell is not in their family, then it is likely not in themselves or their children,” was significantly different between Black and White populations (p = 0.011, OR 95% CI = 0.207 [0.081–0.526]). CONCLUSION:Our findings suggest gaps in screening, testing, education, and pregnancy management choices between Black and White patients. Research should focus on decreasing these healthcare gaps and improving education that address concerns about SCD for relevant populations.
Keywords: Genetic screening, provider practices, sickle cell
DOI: 10.3233/NPM-221016
Journal: Journal of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 745-751, 2022
IOS Press, Inc.
6751 Tepper Drive
Clifton, VA 20124
USA
Tel: +1 703 830 6300
Fax: +1 703 830 2300
sales@iospress.com
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
IOS Press
Nieuwe Hemweg 6B
1013 BG Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 688 3355
Fax: +31 20 687 0091
info@iospress.nl
For editorial issues, permissions, book requests, submissions and proceedings, contact the Amsterdam office info@iospress.nl
Inspirees International (China Office)
Ciyunsi Beili 207(CapitaLand), Bld 1, 7-901
100025, Beijing
China
Free service line: 400 661 8717
Fax: +86 10 8446 7947
china@iospress.cn
For editorial issues, like the status of your submitted paper or proposals, write to editorial@iospress.nl
如果您在出版方面需要帮助或有任何建, 件至: editorial@iospress.nl