Influence of Anchoring on Miscarriage Risk Perception Associated with Amniocentesis

INFLUENCE OF ANCHORING ON MISCARRIAGE RISK PERCEPTION ASSOCIATED WITH AMNIOCENTESIS Publication No. ___________ Regina Nuccio, BS Supervisory Professor: Claire N. Singletary, MS, CGC Amniocentesis is the most common invasive procedure performed during pregnancy (Eddleman, et al., 2006). One important factor that women consider when making a decision about amniocentesis is the risk of miscarriage associated with the procedure. People use heuristics such as anchoring, the action of using a prior belief regarding the magnitude of risk as a frame of reference for new information to be synthesized, to better understand risks that they encounter in their lives. This study aimed to determine a woman’s perception of miscarriage risk associated with amniocentesis before and after a genetic counseling session and to determine what factors are most likely to anchor a woman’s perception of miscarriage risk associated with amniocentesis. Most women perceived the risk as low or average pre-counseling and were likely to indicate the numeric risk of amniocentesis as <1% risk. A higher percentage of patients correctly identified the numeric risk as <1% post-counseling when compared to pre-counseling. However, the majority of patients’ feeling about the risk perception did not change after the genetic counseling session (60%), regardless of how they perceived the risk before discussing amniocentesis with a genetic counselor. Those whose risk perception did change after discussing amniocentesis with a genetic counselor showed a decreased risk perception (p<0.0001). Of the multitude of factors studied, only two showed significance: having a friend or relative with a personal or family history of a genetic disorder was associated with a lower risk perception (p=0.001) and having a child already was associated with a lower risk perception (p=0.038). The lack of significant factors may reflect the uniqueness of each patient’s heuristic framework and reinforces the importance of genetic counseling to elucidate individual concerns.

EFFECT OF ANCHORING ON PERCEIVED AMNIOCENTESIS RELATED MISCARRIAGE RISK WITHIN A LATINA POPULATION

Most recognized pregnancies are completed without difficulty, yet there is always a 3-5% background risk to have a child with a birth defect. Amniocentesis, the most common type of prenatal diagnostic test, is used to detect chromosomal abnormalities, such as Down syndrome. Amniocentesis is associated with a risk of complications that can lead to a miscarriage, which is typically quoted to be between 1 in 300 and 1 in 500. Amniocentesis uptake rates are typically lowest within the Latina community, and although the factors related to this have been studied before, no specific conclusions have been reached. The general population has a difficult time interpreting risks, as individuals vary in numeracy skills as well as personal factors that can influence risk perception. A recent study by Nuccio (2010) investigated the effect of anchoring, where a patient’s prior knowledge about a subject affects her risk perception, and how it relates to the uptake of amniocentesis within a diverse population in Houston, TX. The effect of anchoring on perceived amniocentesis-related miscarriage risk within the Latina population has not been previously examined. A two-part questionnaire was completed by 96 Latinas receiving prenatal genetic counseling due to an increased risk to have a baby with a chromosome abnormality at various clinics in Houston, TX. The genetic counselor involved in the session completed a separate survey. This population was largely unfamiliar with surveys, risk figures, and prenatal testing. Only one individual was able to quantify the risk associated with amniocentesis prior to the genetic counseling. While the majority of women felt that the risk association with amniocentesis is very low to average, only 7 individuals pursued diagnostic testing through amniocentesis. Most women did not feel like the information gained from an amniocentesis would change the management of their pregnancy and/or they did not believe that their baby had a problem. Women, regardless of ethnicity, deserve individualized genetic counseling sessions that cater to their needs and desires regarding their prenatal care.

Prevalence of Premature Ovarian Failure in Women with Tuberous Sclerosis

Tuberous Sclerosis Complex (TSC) is an autosomal dominant tumor suppressor disorder characterized by hamartomas, or benign growths, in various organ systems. Inactivating mutations in either the TSC1 or the TSC2 gene cause most cases of TSC. Recently, the use of ovarian specific conditional knock-out mouse models has demonstrated a crucial role of the TSC genes in ovarian function. Mice with complete deletion of Tsc1 or Tsc2 showed accelerated ovarian follicle activation and subsequent premature follicular depletion, consistent with the human condition premature ovarian failure (POF). POF is defined in women as the cessation of menses before the age of 40 and elevated levels of follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). The prevalence of POF is estimated to be 1%, affecting a substantial number of women in the general population. Nonetheless, the etiology of most cases of POF remains unknown. Based on the mouse model results, we hypothesized that the human TSC1 and TSC2 genes are likely to be crucial for ovarian development and function. Moreover, since women with TSC already have one inactivated TSC gene, we further hypothesized that they may show a higher prevalence of POF. To test this hypothesis, we surveyed 1000 women with TSC belonging to the Tuberous Sclerosis Alliance, a national support organization. 182 questionnaires were analyzed for information on menstrual and reproductive function, as well as TSC. This self-reported data revealed 8 women (4.4%) with possible POF, as determined by menstrual history report and additional supportive data. This prevalence is much higher than 1% in the general population. Data from all women suggested other reproductive pathology associated with TSC such as a high rate of miscarriage (41.2%) and menstrual irregularity of any kind (31.2%). These results establish a previously unappreciated effect of TSC on women’s reproductive health. Moreover, these data suggest that perturbations in the cellular pathways regulated by the TSC genes may play an important role in reproductive function.

The association between maternal use of spermicides, condoms, intra-uterine devices or progesterone and major structural birth defects

Birth defects occur in 1 of every 33 babies born in the United States, and are the leading cause of infant death. Mothers using contraceptives that become pregnant may continue to use their contraceptives after their first missed menstrual period, thus exposing their baby in utero to the contraceptive product. Progesterone is also sometimes prescribed during the first trimester of pregnancy to mothers with a history of miscarriages or infertility problems. To ensure the safety of these products, it is important to investigate whether there is an increased occurrence of babies born with birth defects to mothers using various contraceptive methods or progesterone in early pregnancy. Using data from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study (NBDPS), an ongoing multi-state, population based case-control study, this study assessed maternal exposures to IUDs, spermicides, condoms and progesterone in early pregnancy. ^ Progesterone used for threatened miscarriage during the first three months of pregnancy was associated with an increased occurrence of hypoplastic left heart (adjusted odds ratios (OR) 2.24, 95% CI 1.13-4.21), perimembranous ventricular septal defects (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.10-2.41), septal associations (OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.45-4.24), esophageal atresia (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.04-3.08), and hypospadias (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.41-3.18). Mothers using progesterone for injectable contraception had increased (OR > 2.5), but insignificant odds ratios for anencephaly, septal associations, small intestinal atresias and omphalocel. Progesterone used for fertility was not associated with an increased occurrence of any birth defects examined. ^ Mothers using progesterone for fertility assistance and threatened miscarriage were very similar with respect to their demographics and pregnancy history. They also both reported similar types of progesterone. Thus, if progesterone was a causal risk factor for birth defects we would have expected to observe similar increases in risk among mothers using progesterone for both indications. Because we predominantly observed increased associations among mothers using progesterone for threatened miscarriage but not fertility assistance, it is possible the increased associations we observed were confounded by indication (i.e. progesterone was administered for vaginal bleeding which occurred as a sequelae to the formation of a congenital anomaly. ^ No significant increased associations were observed between maternal spermicide use during pregnancy and 26 of 27 types of structural malformations. While multiple statistical tests were performed we observed first trimester maternal spermicide use to be associated with a significant increased occurrence of perimembranous ventricular septal defects (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.16-4.21). A decreased occurrence (OR < 1.0) was observed for several categories of birth defects among mothers who conceived in the first cycle after discontinuing the use of spermicides (22 of 28) or male condoms (23 of 33). ^ Overall the percent of IUD use was similar between mothers of controls and mothers of all cases in aggregate (crude OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.61-1.84). Power was limited to detect significant associations between IUD use and birth defects, however mothers using an IUD in the month immediately prior to conception or during pregnancy were not associated with an increase of birth defects. Limb defects and amniotic band sequence previously reported to be associated with IUD use during pregnancy were not found to occur among any mothers reporting the use of an IUD during pregnancy.^

ATTITUDES TOWARD AND UTILIZATION OF NON-INVASIVE PRENATAL TESTING FOR CHROMOSOME ANEUPLOIDY AMONG OB/GYNS

Prenatal diagnosis is traditionally made via invasive procedures such as amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling (CVS). However, both procedures carry a risk of complications, including miscarriage. Many groups have spent years searching for a way to diagnose a chromosome aneuploidy without putting the fetus or the mother at risk for complications. Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for chromosome aneuploidy became commercially available in the fall of 2011, with detection rates similar to those of invasive procedures for the common autosomal aneuploidies (Palomaki et al., 2011; Ashoor et al. 2012; Bianchi et al. 2012). Eventually NIPT may become the diagnostic standard of care and reduce invasive procedure-related losses (Palomaki et al., 2011). The integration of NIPT into clinical practice has potential to revolutionize prenatal diagnosis; however, it also raises some crucial issues for practitioners. Now that the test is clinically available, no studies have looked at the physicians that will be ordering the testing or referring patients to practitioners who do. This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes of OB/GYN’s and how they are incorporating the test into clinical practice. Our study shows that most physicians are offering this new, non-invasive technology to their patients, and that their practices were congruent with the literature and available professional society opinions. Those physicians who do not offer NIPT to their patients would like more literature on the topic as well as instructive guidelines from their professional societies. Additionally, this study shows that the practices and attitudes of MFMs and OBs differ. Our population feels that the incorporation of NIPT will change their practices by lowering the amount of invasive procedures, possibly replacing maternal serum screening, and that it will simplify prenatal diagnosis. However, those physicians who do not offer NIPT to their patients are not quite sure how the test will affect their clinical practice. From this study we are able to glean how physicians are incorporating this new technology into their practice and how they feel about the addition to their repertoire of tests. This knowledge gives insight as to how to best move forward with the quickly changing field of prenatal diagnosis.