Questioning the costs and benefits of non-invasive prenatal testing

Katie Stoll, Monica Lutgendorf, Dana Knutzen, Peter E. Nielsen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

Prenatal testing for Down syndrome through the use of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been increasingly implemented in clinical practice and a recent cost analysis suggests that NIPT is cost effective when compared to other screening modalities in high risk populations. However, this anaylsis makes many assumptions regarding uptake of testing and pregnancy termination, which cannot be applied to all populations in the United States. Additionally, this cost analysis, which hinges on fewer Down syndrome births, does not align with the goals of prenatal testing to support autonomous and value consistent decisions. NIPT is an expensive new technology and more careful analysis is needed to determine the impact of NIPT on outcomes and overall healthcare costs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)633-634
Number of pages2
JournalJournal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine
Volume27
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2014
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Aneuploidy screening
  • Costs analysis
  • Down syndrome
  • Prenatal screening

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Questioning the costs and benefits of non-invasive prenatal testing'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this