Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Utilization of available prenatal screening and diagnosis: effects of the California screen program

Journal of Perinatology volume 32, pages 907–912 (2012)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Objective:

In 2009, the California Genetic Disease Branch introduced an aneuploidy screening program allowing Medi-Cal (state insured) patients access to state-sponsored first-trimester screening. The objective of this study was to assess the effect of greater access to prenatal screening on available resources at a single center.

Study Design:

Data of prenatal screening and diagnostic procedures performed 4 months before the introduction of the program were compared with those of 12 months following the introduction.

Result:

Between December 2008 and March 2010, 7689 women underwent first trimester screening, 1286 underwent amniocentesis and 398 underwent chorionic villus sampling. When a comparison was made between the 4 months before and the 12 months after the program's introduction, a greater number of nuchal translucency (NT) examinations was seen to have been performed (384 per month vs 513 per month, P=0.001). Prenatal diagnostic procedures did not increase, but a greater proportion was performed for positive screen results.

Conclusion:

Introduction of the California screening program was associated with increased NT procedures and fewer invasive procedures for advanced maternal age.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Malone FD, Canick JA, Ball RH, Nyberg DA, Comstock CH, Bukowski R et al. First-trimester or second-trimester screening, or both, for Down's syndrome. N Engl J Med 2005; 353 (19): 2001–2011.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Wapner R, Thom E, Simpson JL, Pergament E, Silver R, Filkins K et al. First-trimester screening for trisomies 21 and 18. N Engl J Med 2003; 349 (15): 1405–1413.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. ACOG. Invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 88, December 2007. Obstet Gynecol 2007; 110 (6): 1459–1467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Caughey AB, Hopkins LM, Norton ME . Chorionic villus sampling compared with amniocentesis and the difference in the rate of pregnancy loss. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 108 (3 Pt 1): 612–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Tabor A, Vestergaard CH, Lidegaard O . Fetal loss rate after chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis: an 11-year national registry study. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2009; 34 (1): 19–24.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Nakata N, Wang Y, Bhatt S . Trends in prenatal screening and diagnostic testing among women referred for advanced maternal age. Prenat Diagn 2010; 30 (3): 198–206.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ekelund CK, Jorgensen FS, Petersen OB, Sundberg K, Tabor A . Impact of a new national screening policy for Down's syndrome in Denmark: population based cohort study. BMJ 2008; 337: a2547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Muhsen K, Na’amnah W, Lesser Y, Volovik I, Cohen D, Shohat T . Determinates of underutilization of amniocentesis among Israeli Arab women. Prenat Diagn 2010; 30 (2): 138–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fransen MP, Wildschut HI, Mackenbach JP, Steegers EA, Galjaard RJ, Essink-Bot ML . Ethnic and socio-economic differences in uptake of prenatal diagnostic tests for Down's syndrome. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2010; 151 (2): 158–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kuppermann M, Learman LA, Gates E, Gregorich SE, Nease RF Jr, Lewis J et al. Beyond race or ethnicity and socioeconomic status: predictors of prenatal testing for Down syndrome. Obstet Gynecol 2006; 107 (5): 1087–1097.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Caughey AB, Washington AE, Kuppermann M . Perceived risk of prenatal diagnostic procedure-related miscarriage and Down syndrome among pregnant women. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 198 (3): 333 e1-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Division of Maternal-Fetal Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine/Lucile Salter Packard Children's Hospital, Stanford, CA, USA

    Y J Blumenfeld, J F Sung & Y Y El-Sayed

  2. Department of Medical Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA

    J Taylor

  3. Department of Pediatrics, Division of Neonatology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    H C Lee

  4. Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine/Lucile Salter Packard Children's Hospital, Stanford, CA, USA

    L Hudgins

Authors
  1. Y J Blumenfeld
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J Taylor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H C Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. L Hudgins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J F Sung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Y Y El-Sayed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Y J Blumenfeld.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

The manuscript was presented in poster format at the American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists Annual Meeting, May 2010, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blumenfeld, Y., Taylor, J., Lee, H. et al. Utilization of available prenatal screening and diagnosis: effects of the California screen program. J Perinatol 32, 907–912 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2012.8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2012.8

Keywords

Search

Advanced search

Quick links