The attitudes of Dutch fertility specialists towards the addition of genetic testing in screening of tubal factor infertility

Jelena Malogajski, Marleen E. Jansen*, Sander Ouburg, Elena Ambrosino, Caroline B. Terwee, Servaas A. Morré

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background This study aims to identify elements perceived by Dutch fertility specialists as barriers and facilitators for the introduction of genetic testing, and their attitudes towards the use of genetic information. The genetic test would be implemented in routine screening for tubal pathology and identifies SNPs relevant for the immune response causing tubal pathology. Methods Experienced reproductive specialists working in Dutch Academic Hospitals were interviewed. Based on the results of four interviews a questionnaire was developed and used to survey medical doctors in six out of eight Dutch Academic hospitals. Results 60.4% (n = 91) stated that the addition of genetic markers to the Chlamydia trachomatis antibody test (CAT) in screening for tubal pathology would increase screening accuracy. 68.2% (n = 90) agreed they would require additional training on clinical genetics. Clinical utility (91.2%, n = 91) and cost-effectiveness (95.6%, n = 91) were recognized by the respondents as important factors in gaining support for the new screening strategy. Conclusion In summary, respondents showed a positive attitude towards the implementation of a genetic test combined with CAT for tubal factor infertility (TFI) screening. To gain their support the majority of respondents agreed that clinical utility, specifically cost-effectiveness, is an important factor. Comprehensive research about economic implications and utility regarding the introduction of genomic markers should be the next step in the implementation strategy. Furthermore, education and training would need to be developed and offered to fertility care professionals about genetic markers, their interpretation, and implications for clinical decision-making.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)123-127
Number of pages5
JournalSexual and Reproductive Healthcare
Volume12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jun 2017

Cite this