Some centers are now performing a pregnancy ultrasound called a nuchal translucency screening test around 9 to 13 weeks of pregnancy. This test is done to look for signs of Down syndrome or other problems in the developing baby. This test is often combined with blood tests to improve the accuracy of results. How many ultrasounds you will need depends on whether a previous scan or blood test has detected problems that require follow-up testing.
The developing baby, placenta, amniotic fluid, and surrounding structures appear normal for the gestational age. Note: Normal results may vary slightly. Talk to your doctor about the meaning of your specific test results. Pregnancy sonogram; Obstetric ultrasonography; Obstetric sonogram; Ultrasound - pregnancy; IUGR - ultrasound; Intrauterine growth - ultrasound; Polyhydramnios - ultrasound; Oligohydramnios - ultrasound; Placenta previa - ultrasound; Multiple pregnancy - ultrasound; Vaginal bleeding during pregnancy - ultrasound; Fetal monitoring - ultrasound.
Richards DS. Obstetric ultrasound: imaging, dating, growth, and anomaly. Gabbe's Obstetrics: Normal and Problem Pregnancies. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; chap 9. Wapner RJ, Dugoff L. Prenatal diagnosis of congenital disorders.
Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; chap Wolf RB. Abdominal imaging. There were substantial differences in foetal screening participation rates between primipara and multipara women, women with high versus low education level, and women in urban and rural areas Table 1. To test potential recall bias regarding the number of early scans, we compared the number of scans reported by the same women in phases I and II.
When the routine scan in week 19 was excluded from the total reported in phase II, the numbers corresponded well Fig. Table 2a shows how the decision to attend or decline prenatal screening for foetal anomalies was reached. It appears that the decision was typically reached within the family, marginally influenced by a healthcare professional.
Table 3 shows how the participants evaluated the information they had received regarding the prenatal screening, subsequent diagnostic tests and associated risks. Most women were satisfied with the information they got about the screening programme as such, but less satisfied with the information about its potential downsides and risks. Table 2d shows the reasons women reported to underpin this decision. The Icelandic Childbirth and Health Study is a comprehensive primary care cohort study on pregnancy and childbirth.
There were substantial differences in screening participation between subgroups. This is likely to mirror varying accessibility to secondary health care, as well as differing views of what it means to be pregnant and how to behave in this situation. Similarly, the issue of medicalization of pregnancy has been debated for years [ 27 ].
To what extent the frequent use of ultrasound scanning found in this study represents a favourable trend, or whether it entails a tendency towards undue medicalisation of pregnancy and misuse of healthcare resources, is open for debate.
Our study indicates that the decision to attend prenatal screening in week 11—14 was mainly made within the family, and not directly initiated by a healthcare professional. Interestingly, however, when asked about pre-screening information about potential associated risks, many found this unsatisfactory. Similar findings have been reported from Sweden [ 5 , 28 ].
This might stem from lacking, suboptimal or biased pre-screening information given by the healthcare workers, but perhaps also from low receptivity to information on potential downsides of screening among the women prior to the decision to participate.
Asking them later, as we did in our study, might thereby elicit some afterthoughts. It would be interesting to study the information process in more detail at the different provider settings and levels. As Williams [ 13 ] has pointed out, a general criticism of prenatal screening is that the women might not realize how much technology has come to influence the culture surrounding pregnancy, nor what a genuinely free choice actually entails.
The main reason our responding women gave for declining the early foetal screening test, was their personal values and beliefs. This is also in accordance with earlier studies on the subject [ 29 , 30 ]. To our knowledge, this is the first study of ultrasound scanning among Icelandic women in the first half of pregnancy, until the recommended routine scan in week It might also be that some women in our study misclassified an early clinical scan as formal screening.
This is much lower than in our study. This can probably be explained by the introduction of an offer of prenatal screening between to [ 34 ]. Norway currently has no established programme for early foetal screening. Experts in foetal medicine however report that a high number of pregnant Norwegian women seek out a private clinic and have an early ultrasound scan done there, not unlike the Icelandic situation [ 36 ].
If that scan is suggestive of anything abnormal, the woman is referred to an authorized department for foetal medicine.
The original sample has been considered relatively representative [ 23 , 32 ]. Our convenience sampling method is unlikely to have resulted in serious selection bias, as the study addressed women who attended routine antenatal care, with a focus on their general experiences, thoughts and attitudes as pregnant women in modern society. A certain response bias could, however, not be avoided, as women who ultimately answered the questionnaires are likely to have been more interested in the research topics than those who were initially positive, but did not return the questionnaire [ 24 ].
Women with higher education might be somewhat overrepresented [ 32 ]. It is a weakness that the number of ultrasound scans are self-reported, but our test of potential recall bias suggests that the overall numbers are quite reliable. Another weakness is the drop out between Phases I before mid-pregnancy and II after delivery.
Several factors may have contributed to this. In , the financial crisis in Iceland led to substantial work-related emigration, and it is likely that some of our original participants had left the country. We do not have precise data on these matters.
Ultrasound scans in early pregnancy are in high use in Iceland and have apparently become a profiled part of the pregnancy culture. We found substantial variations regarding uptake of early foetal screening among subgroups. Whether the widespread use of early scanning represents a favourable development or a sign of undue medicalization and overuse of medical resources, can be debated.
Information prior to prenatal screening for foetal anomalies might be improved, particularly regarding potential side effects and risks associated with the screening programme.
International Society for Prenat Diagn In. Accessed Dec Presence of fetal DNA in maternal plasma and serum. Kristjansdottir H, Gottfredsdottir H.
Making sense of the situation: women's reflection of positive fetal screening months after giving birth. Article Google Scholar. Hewison J. Psychological aspects of individualized choice and reproductive autonomy in prenatal screening. Georgsson Ohman S, Waldenstrom U. Second-trimester routine ultrasound screening: expectations and experiences in a nationwide Swedish sample.
Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. Getz L, Kirkengen AL. Ultrasound screening in pregnancy: advancing technology, soft markers for fetal chromosomal aberrations, and unacknowledged ethical dilemmas.
Soc Sci Med. Why women want prenatal ultrasound in normal pregnancy. Why do women seek ultrasound scans from commercial providers during pregnancy? Sociol Health Illn. Nordforsk: Legislation on biotehcnology in the Nordic countries - an overview First-trimester screening for Down syndrome using nuchal translucency measurement with free beta-hCG and PAPP-A between 10 and 13 weeks of pregnancy--the combined test.
Prenat Diagn. English: Noninvasive detection of fetal trisomy and inherited sex-linked disease. Prospective validation of first-trimester combined screening for trisomy Women as moral pioneers? It is the role of science to show whether any of these bioeffects may be harmful. A risk-benefit analysis may also be important, as well as education of the end users to assure patients' safety. Abstract Ultrasound is, arguably, the most commonly used diagnostic procedure in obstetrics.
Publication types Review.
0コメント