"The anxiety coming up to every scan-It destroyed me": A qualitative study of the lived experience of cytomegalovirus infection during pregnancy.
Journal
Prenatal diagnosis
ISSN: 1097-0223
Titre abrégé: Prenat Diagn
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8106540
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 Apr 2024
05 Apr 2024
Historique:
revised:
12
02
2024
received:
17
12
2023
accepted:
22
03
2024
medline:
5
4
2024
pubmed:
5
4
2024
entrez:
5
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Emerging evidence supporting the use of valaciclovir to reduce fetal infection after maternal primary cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection has stimulated interest in routine CMV serological screening in pregnancy. It is important to understand the healthcare consumer perspective of a CMV infection during pregnancy to minimize unintended harms of screening. We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with Australian women who had a lived experience of CMV infection following serological testing during pregnancy. Participants were recruited via social media and healthcare consumer networks, and purposively selected to capture a range of perinatal outcomes. Interview transcripts were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Twelve participants were interviewed: 6 had a live birth, 4 had terminations of pregnancy, 1 had a neonatal death and 1 was pregnant at the time of interview. Four major categories emerged from the analysis. Women reported a lack of CMV awareness among themselves, their social networks, and among their health care providers. The participants described their experience as "hard" and "stressful". Uncertainty and variability characterized their clinical decision-making process. The pregnancy and postpartum periods were marked by ongoing anxiety about the long-term impacts of CMV. Women supported screening for CMV, decision making and reproductive choice, but acknowledged that routine testing may not be desired by everyone and may increase stress and terminations of pregnancy. Important coping strategies included obtaining support from partners, family, and other families with lived experience of CMV, as well as having access to knowledgeable and sensitive healthcare professionals. Serological diagnosis of maternal CMV infection during pregnancy can have severe and prolonged psychological impacts on parents, regardless of the pregnancy outcome. Improving healthcare professionals' knowledge and public awareness are essential before widespread serological screening can be responsibly introduced. Healthcare administrators that are considering implementing a prenatal screening program for secondary prevention of fetal CMV infection should pay attention to consumer perspectives to minimize unintended harms to women and their families.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Emerging evidence supporting the use of valaciclovir to reduce fetal infection after maternal primary cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection has stimulated interest in routine CMV serological screening in pregnancy. It is important to understand the healthcare consumer perspective of a CMV infection during pregnancy to minimize unintended harms of screening.
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with Australian women who had a lived experience of CMV infection following serological testing during pregnancy. Participants were recruited via social media and healthcare consumer networks, and purposively selected to capture a range of perinatal outcomes. Interview transcripts were analyzed using inductive content analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Twelve participants were interviewed: 6 had a live birth, 4 had terminations of pregnancy, 1 had a neonatal death and 1 was pregnant at the time of interview. Four major categories emerged from the analysis. Women reported a lack of CMV awareness among themselves, their social networks, and among their health care providers. The participants described their experience as "hard" and "stressful". Uncertainty and variability characterized their clinical decision-making process. The pregnancy and postpartum periods were marked by ongoing anxiety about the long-term impacts of CMV. Women supported screening for CMV, decision making and reproductive choice, but acknowledged that routine testing may not be desired by everyone and may increase stress and terminations of pregnancy. Important coping strategies included obtaining support from partners, family, and other families with lived experience of CMV, as well as having access to knowledgeable and sensitive healthcare professionals.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Serological diagnosis of maternal CMV infection during pregnancy can have severe and prolonged psychological impacts on parents, regardless of the pregnancy outcome. Improving healthcare professionals' knowledge and public awareness are essential before widespread serological screening can be responsibly introduced. Healthcare administrators that are considering implementing a prenatal screening program for secondary prevention of fetal CMV infection should pay attention to consumer perspectives to minimize unintended harms to women and their families.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Norman Beischer Medical Research Foundation
Informations de copyright
© 2024 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Ssentongo P, Hehnly C, Birungi P, et al. Congenital cytomegalovirus infection burden and epidemiologic risk factors in countries with universal screening: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2021;4(8):e2120736. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.20736
Rawlinson WD, Boppana SB, Fowler KB, et al. Congenital cytomegalovirus infection in pregnancy and the neonate: consensus recommendations for prevention, diagnosis, and therapy. Lancet Infect Dis. 2017;17(6):e177‐e188. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1473‐3099(17)30143‐3
Chatzakis C, Ville Y, Makrydimas G, Dinas K, Zavlanos A, Sotiriadis A. Timing of primary maternal cytomegalovirus infection and rates of vertical transmission and fetal consequences. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020;223(6):870‐883.e11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.05.038
Xie M, Tripathi T, Holmes NE, Hui L. Serological screening for cytomegalovirus during pregnancy: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and consensus statements. Prenat Diagn. 2023;43(7):959‐967. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.6397
Pass RF, Hutto C, Lyon MD, Cloud G. Increased rate of cytomegalovirus infection among day care center workers. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1990;9(7):465‐470. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006454‐199007000‐00003
Geris JM, Spector LG, Roesler M, et al. High prevalence of asymptomatic CMV shedding in healthy children attending the Minnesota state fair. J Clin Virol. 2022;148:105102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2022.105102
Shahar‐Nissan K, Pardo J, Peled O, et al. Valaciclovir to prevent vertical transmission of cytomegalovirus after maternal primary infection during pregnancy: a randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial. Lancet. 2020;396(10253):779‐785. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140‐6736(20)31868‐7
Chatzakis C, Shahar‐Nissan K, Faure‐Bardon V, et al. The effect of valacyclovir on secondary prevention of congenital cytomegalovirus infection, following primary maternal infection acquired periconceptionally or in the first trimester of pregnancy. An individual patient data meta‐analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023;S0002‐9378(23):00470‐00472.
Ville Y. Advocating for cytomegalovirus maternal serologic screening in the first trimester of pregnancy: if you do not know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM. 2021;3(4):100356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajogmf.2021.100356
Enders M, Daiminger A, Exler S, Enders G. Amniocentesis for prenatal diagnosis of cytomegalovirus infection: challenging the 21 weeks' threshold. Prenat Diagn. 2017;37(9):940‐942. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.5107
Beloosesky R, Feldblum I, Shrim A, et al. Trends in continuity of pregnancy in women with positive cytomegalovirus IgM during the first trimester, 2008‐2009. Isr Med Assoc J. 2017;19(8):484‐488.
Revello MG, Fabbri E, Furione M, et al. Role of prenatal diagnosis and counseling in the management of 735 pregnancies complicated by primary human cytomegalovirus infection: a 20‐year experience. J Clin Virol. 2011;50(4):303‐307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2010.12.012
Uehara K, Kaneko M, Matsuoka A, Kuroki M, Minematsu T. A cross‐sectional study on maternal anxiety levels after cytomegalovirus screening. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2020;41(3):240‐245. https://doi.org/10.1080/0167482x.2019.1658734
Zappas MP, Devereaux A, Pesch MH. The psychosocial impact of congenital cytomegalovirus on caregivers and families: lived experiences and review of the literature. Int J Neonatal Screen. 2023;9(2):30. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns9020030
O'Brien BC, Harris IB, Beckman TJ, Reed DA, Cook DA. Standards for reporting qualitative research: a synthesis of recommendations. Acad Med. 2014;89(9):1245‐1251. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000000388
Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, et al. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015;42(5):533‐544.
CMV Australia. https://www.cmv.org.au/. Accessed November 7, 2023.
Vears DF, Gillam L. Inductive content analysis: a guide for beginning qualitative researchers. Focus Health Prof Educ. 2022;23(1):111‐127. https://doi.org/10.11157/fohpe.v23i1.544
Lazzaro A, Vo ML, Zeltzer J, et al. Knowledge of congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) in pregnant women in Australia is low, and improved with education. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019;59(6):843‐849. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12978
Shand AW, Luk W, Nassar N, Hui L, Dyer K, Rawlinson W. Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection and pregnancy‐potential for improvements in Australasian maternity health providers' knowledge. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018;31(19):2515‐2520. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2017.1344968
Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Statement on prevention of congenital cytomegalovirus. 2022. Accessed November 7 at. https://ranzcog.edu.au/wp‐content/uploads/2022/05/Prevention‐of‐congenital‐cytomegalovirus‐CMV‐infection‐C‐Obs‐64.pdf
Jeon J, Victor M, Adler SP, et al. Knowledge and awareness of congenital cytomegalovirus among women. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 2006;2006:80383‐80387. https://doi.org/10.1155/idog/2006/80383
Castillo K, Hawkins‐Villarreal A, Valdés‐Bango M, et al. Congenital cytomegalovirus awareness and knowledge among health professionals and pregnant women: an action towards prevention. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2022;49(5‐6):265‐272. https://doi.org/10.1159/000525528
Greye H, Henning S, Freese K, et al. Cross‐sectional study to assess awareness of cytomegalovirus infection among pregnant women in Germany. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2022;22(1):964. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884‐022‐05312‐8
Hodgson J, McClaren BJ. Parental experiences after prenatal diagnosis of fetal abnormality. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2018;23(2):150‐154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.siny.2017.11.009
Lewis C, Hill M, Chitty LS. Offering non‐invasive prenatal testing as part of routine clinical service. Can high levels of informed choice be maintained? Prenat Diagn. 2017;37(11):1130‐1137. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.5154
Bowden FJ. Reconsidering HIV testing‐‐consent is still the key. Sex Health. 2005;2(3):165‐167. https://doi.org/10.1071/sh05016
Harding E, Hammond J, Chitty LS, Hill M, Lewis C. Couples experiences of receiving uncertain results following prenatal microarray or exome sequencing: a mixed‐methods systematic review. Prenat Diagn. 2020;40(8):1028‐1039. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.5729
Werner‐Lin A, Walser S, Barg FK, Bernhardt BA. “They can't find anything wrong with him, yet”: mothers' experiences of parenting an infant with a prenatally diagnosed copy number variant (CNV). Am J Med Genet A. 2017;173(2):444‐451. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.a.38042
Hodgson J, Pitt P, Metcalfe S, et al. Experiences of prenatal diagnosis and decision‐making about termination of pregnancy: a qualitative study. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016;56(6):605‐613. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12501
Hashiloni‐Dolev Y, Nov‐Klaiman T, Raz A. Pandora's pregnancy: NIPT, CMA, and genome sequencing ‐ a new era for prenatal genetic testing. Prenat Diagn. 2019;39(10):859‐865. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.5495
Naing ZW, Scott GM, Shand A, et al. Congenital cytomegalovirus infection in pregnancy: a review of prevalence, clinical features, diagnosis and prevention. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016;56(1):9‐18. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.12408
Smithers‐Sheedy H, Swinburn K, Waight E, et al. eLearning significantly improves maternity professionals' knowledge of the congenital cytomegalovirus prevention guidelines. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2022;62(3):445‐452. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13500
Craig KP, Riggan KA, Rubeck S, Meredith SH, Allyse MA, Michie M. Never “totally prepared”: support groups on helping families prepare for a child with a genetic condition. J Community Genet. 2023;14(3):319‐327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12687‐023‐00646‐y
Rudd IP, Marzan MB, Hui L. Cytomegalovirus serological screening at the first antenatal visit: a tertiary‐centre audit of general practitioner practices and maternal seroprevalence. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2023;63(3):454‐459. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajo.13645