Provision of information about newborn screening antenatally: a sequential exploratory mixed-methods project

Background: Participation in the UK Newborn Bloodspot Screening Programme (NBSP) requires parental consent but concerns exist about whether or not this happens in practice and the best methods and timing to obtain consent at reasonable cost. Objectives: To collate all possible modes of prescreening...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fiona Ulph, Stuart Wright, Nimarta Dharni, Katherine Payne, Rebecca Bennett, Stephen Roberts, Kieran Walshe, Tina Lavender
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: NIHR Journals Library 2017-10-01
Series:Health Technology Assessment
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.3310/hta21550
_version_ 1818522396909371392
author Fiona Ulph
Stuart Wright
Nimarta Dharni
Katherine Payne
Rebecca Bennett
Stephen Roberts
Kieran Walshe
Tina Lavender
author_facet Fiona Ulph
Stuart Wright
Nimarta Dharni
Katherine Payne
Rebecca Bennett
Stephen Roberts
Kieran Walshe
Tina Lavender
author_sort Fiona Ulph
collection DOAJ
description Background: Participation in the UK Newborn Bloodspot Screening Programme (NBSP) requires parental consent but concerns exist about whether or not this happens in practice and the best methods and timing to obtain consent at reasonable cost. Objectives: To collate all possible modes of prescreening communication and consent for newborn (neonatal) screening (NBS); examine midwives’, screening professionals’ and users’ views about the feasibility, efficiency and impact on understanding of each; measure midwives’ and parents’ preferences for information provision; and identify key drivers of cost-effectiveness for alternative modes of information provision. Design: Six study designs were used: (1) realist review – to generate alternative communication and consent models; (2) qualitative interviews with parents and health professionals – to examine the implications of current practice for understanding and views on alternative models; (3) survey and observation of midwives – to establish current costs; (4) stated preference surveys with midwives, parents and potential future parents – to establish preferences for information provision; (5) economic analysis – to identify cost-effectiveness drivers of alternative models; and (6) stakeholder validation focus groups and interviews – to examine the acceptability, views and broader impact of alternative communication and consent models. Setting: Providers and users of NBS in England. Participants: Study 2: 45 parents and 37 health professionals; study 3: 22 midwives and eight observations; study 4: 705 adults aged 18–45 years and 134 midwives; and study 6: 12 health-care professionals and five parents. Results: The realist review identified low parental knowledge and evidence of coercive consent practices. Interview, focus group and stated preference data suggested a preference for full information, with some valuing this more than choice. Health professionals preferred informed choice models but parents and health professionals queried whether or not current consent was fully informed. Barriers to using leaflets effectively were highlighted. All studies indicated that a ‘personalised’ approach to NBS communication, allowing parents to select the mode and level of information suited to their learning needs, could have added value. A personalised approach should rely on midwife communication and should occur in the third trimester. Overall awareness was identified as requiring improvement. Starting NBS communication by alerting parents that they have a choice to make and telling them that samples could be stored are both likely to enhance engagement. The methods of information provision and maternal anxiety causing additional visits to health-care professionals were the drivers of relative cost-effectiveness. Lack of data to populate an economic analysis, confirmed by value of information analysis, indicated a need for further research. Limitations: There are some limitations with regard to the range of participants used in studies 2 and 3 and so caution should be exercised when interpreting some of the results. Conclusions: This project highlighted the importance of focusing on information receipt and identified key communication barriers. Health professionals strongly preferred informed consent, which parents endorsed if they were made aware of sample storage. Uniform models of information provision were perceived as ineffective. A choice of information provision was supported by health professionals and parents, which both enhances cost-effectiveness and improves engagement, understanding and the validity of consent. Remaining uncertainties suggest that more research is needed before new communication modes are introduced into practice. Future research should measure the impact of the suggested practice changes (informing in third trimester, information toolkits, changed role of midwife). Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN70227207. Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 55. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
first_indexed 2024-12-11T05:32:42Z
format Article
id doaj.art-a58e68379197463e8f1a06d01f6c9fe3
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1366-5278
2046-4924
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-11T05:32:42Z
publishDate 2017-10-01
publisher NIHR Journals Library
record_format Article
series Health Technology Assessment
spelling doaj.art-a58e68379197463e8f1a06d01f6c9fe32022-12-22T01:19:23ZengNIHR Journals LibraryHealth Technology Assessment1366-52782046-49242017-10-01215510.3310/hta2155011/62/02Provision of information about newborn screening antenatally: a sequential exploratory mixed-methods projectFiona Ulph0Stuart Wright1Nimarta Dharni2Katherine Payne3Rebecca Bennett4Stephen Roberts5Kieran Walshe6Tina Lavender7Division of Mental Health and Psychology, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKDivision of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKDivision of Mental Health and Psychology, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKDivision of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKSchool of Law, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKDivision of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKAlliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKDivision of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester, UKBackground: Participation in the UK Newborn Bloodspot Screening Programme (NBSP) requires parental consent but concerns exist about whether or not this happens in practice and the best methods and timing to obtain consent at reasonable cost. Objectives: To collate all possible modes of prescreening communication and consent for newborn (neonatal) screening (NBS); examine midwives’, screening professionals’ and users’ views about the feasibility, efficiency and impact on understanding of each; measure midwives’ and parents’ preferences for information provision; and identify key drivers of cost-effectiveness for alternative modes of information provision. Design: Six study designs were used: (1) realist review – to generate alternative communication and consent models; (2) qualitative interviews with parents and health professionals – to examine the implications of current practice for understanding and views on alternative models; (3) survey and observation of midwives – to establish current costs; (4) stated preference surveys with midwives, parents and potential future parents – to establish preferences for information provision; (5) economic analysis – to identify cost-effectiveness drivers of alternative models; and (6) stakeholder validation focus groups and interviews – to examine the acceptability, views and broader impact of alternative communication and consent models. Setting: Providers and users of NBS in England. Participants: Study 2: 45 parents and 37 health professionals; study 3: 22 midwives and eight observations; study 4: 705 adults aged 18–45 years and 134 midwives; and study 6: 12 health-care professionals and five parents. Results: The realist review identified low parental knowledge and evidence of coercive consent practices. Interview, focus group and stated preference data suggested a preference for full information, with some valuing this more than choice. Health professionals preferred informed choice models but parents and health professionals queried whether or not current consent was fully informed. Barriers to using leaflets effectively were highlighted. All studies indicated that a ‘personalised’ approach to NBS communication, allowing parents to select the mode and level of information suited to their learning needs, could have added value. A personalised approach should rely on midwife communication and should occur in the third trimester. Overall awareness was identified as requiring improvement. Starting NBS communication by alerting parents that they have a choice to make and telling them that samples could be stored are both likely to enhance engagement. The methods of information provision and maternal anxiety causing additional visits to health-care professionals were the drivers of relative cost-effectiveness. Lack of data to populate an economic analysis, confirmed by value of information analysis, indicated a need for further research. Limitations: There are some limitations with regard to the range of participants used in studies 2 and 3 and so caution should be exercised when interpreting some of the results. Conclusions: This project highlighted the importance of focusing on information receipt and identified key communication barriers. Health professionals strongly preferred informed consent, which parents endorsed if they were made aware of sample storage. Uniform models of information provision were perceived as ineffective. A choice of information provision was supported by health professionals and parents, which both enhances cost-effectiveness and improves engagement, understanding and the validity of consent. Remaining uncertainties suggest that more research is needed before new communication modes are introduced into practice. Future research should measure the impact of the suggested practice changes (informing in third trimester, information toolkits, changed role of midwife). Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN70227207. Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 55. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.https://doi.org/10.3310/hta21550newbornscreeningconsentcommunicationqualitativeeconomicmidwife
spellingShingle Fiona Ulph
Stuart Wright
Nimarta Dharni
Katherine Payne
Rebecca Bennett
Stephen Roberts
Kieran Walshe
Tina Lavender
Provision of information about newborn screening antenatally: a sequential exploratory mixed-methods project
Health Technology Assessment
newborn
screening
consent
communication
qualitative
economic
midwife
title Provision of information about newborn screening antenatally: a sequential exploratory mixed-methods project
title_full Provision of information about newborn screening antenatally: a sequential exploratory mixed-methods project
title_fullStr Provision of information about newborn screening antenatally: a sequential exploratory mixed-methods project
title_full_unstemmed Provision of information about newborn screening antenatally: a sequential exploratory mixed-methods project
title_short Provision of information about newborn screening antenatally: a sequential exploratory mixed-methods project
title_sort provision of information about newborn screening antenatally a sequential exploratory mixed methods project
topic newborn
screening
consent
communication
qualitative
economic
midwife
url https://doi.org/10.3310/hta21550
work_keys_str_mv AT fionaulph provisionofinformationaboutnewbornscreeningantenatallyasequentialexploratorymixedmethodsproject
AT stuartwright provisionofinformationaboutnewbornscreeningantenatallyasequentialexploratorymixedmethodsproject
AT nimartadharni provisionofinformationaboutnewbornscreeningantenatallyasequentialexploratorymixedmethodsproject
AT katherinepayne provisionofinformationaboutnewbornscreeningantenatallyasequentialexploratorymixedmethodsproject
AT rebeccabennett provisionofinformationaboutnewbornscreeningantenatallyasequentialexploratorymixedmethodsproject
AT stephenroberts provisionofinformationaboutnewbornscreeningantenatallyasequentialexploratorymixedmethodsproject
AT kieranwalshe provisionofinformationaboutnewbornscreeningantenatallyasequentialexploratorymixedmethodsproject
AT tinalavender provisionofinformationaboutnewbornscreeningantenatallyasequentialexploratorymixedmethodsproject