IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1997876962-967_1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Routine prenatal screening for congenital heart disease: What can be expected? A decision-analytic approach

Author

Listed:
  • Buskens, E.
  • Steyerberg, E.W.
  • Hess, J.
  • Wladimiroff, J.W.
  • Grobbee, D.E.

Abstract

Objectives. This study assessed the potential impact of fetal ultrasound screening on the number of newborns affected by cardiac anomalies. Methods. A decision model was developed that included the prevalence and history of congenital heart disease. characteristics of ultrasound, risk of abortion, and attitude toward pregnancy termination. Probabilities were obtained with a literature survey; sensitivity analysis showed their influence on expected outcomes. Results. Presently, screening programs may prevent the birth of approximately 1300 severely affected newborns per million second-trimester pregnancies. However, over 2000 terminations of pregnancy would be required, 750 of which would have ended in intrauterine death or spontaneous abortion. Further, 9900 false-positive screening results would occur, requiring referral. Only the sensitivity of routine screening and attitude toward termination of pregnancy appeared to influence the yield substantially. Conclusions. The impact of routine screening for congenital heart disease appeared relatively small. Further data may be required to fully assess the utility of prenatal screening.

Suggested Citation

  • Buskens, E. & Steyerberg, E.W. & Hess, J. & Wladimiroff, J.W. & Grobbee, D.E., 1997. "Routine prenatal screening for congenital heart disease: What can be expected? A decision-analytic approach," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 87(6), pages 962-967.
    • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1997:87:6:962-967_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1997:87:6:962-967_1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.