569: Evaluation and development of patient educational materials for maternal plasma DNA testing

Abstract

ObjectiveOur center began offering the option of maternal plasma DNA testing to women at high risk for aneuploidy in November 2011. This additional option added more complexity to prenatal counseling. Our goal was to assess patient educational materials available on this topic. After concluding that existing patient education material did not meet patient needs, we developed and evaluated a new brochure.Study DesignWe collected patient informational materials available from companies that were offering, or intended to offer, plasma DNA testing. We reviewed and assessed the materials, using the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) review process and the Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level tests. We created and evaluated a generic educational brochure and tested it through patient focus groups. Materials were also reviewed for proposed content based on recommendation from professional organizations.ResultsWe evaluated educational materials from Ariosa Diagnostics, Sequenom CMM, and Verinata, as well as our generic brochure. Only the generic brochure was rated ‘acceptable’ in literacy (Table 1) and material from the commercial companies was found to be lacking in all or some content areas (Table 2). Critiques from focus groups of six pregnant women from the greater Providence, RI region were constructive, including adding more information about trisomies 18 and 13, providing a realistic miscarriage risk, and providing further information about cost and insurance coverage. The new material created by our group had complete information in all recommended content areas.ConclusionTables 1 and 2 ObjectiveOur center began offering the option of maternal plasma DNA testing to women at high risk for aneuploidy in November 2011. This additional option added more complexity to prenatal counseling. Our goal was to assess patient educational materials available on this topic. After concluding that existing patient education material did not meet patient needs, we developed and evaluated a new brochure. Our center began offering the option of maternal plasma DNA testing to women at high risk for aneuploidy in November 2011. This additional option added more complexity to prenatal counseling. Our goal was to assess patient educational materials available on this topic. After concluding that existing patient education material did not meet patient needs, we developed and evaluated a new brochure. Study DesignWe collected patient informational materials available from companies that were offering, or intended to offer, plasma DNA testing. We reviewed and assessed the materials, using the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) review process and the Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level tests. We created and evaluated a generic educational brochure and tested it through patient focus groups. Materials were also reviewed for proposed content based on recommendation from professional organizations. We collected patient informational materials available from companies that were offering, or intended to offer, plasma DNA testing. We reviewed and assessed the materials, using the Suitability Assessment of Materials (SAM) review process and the Flesch Reading Ease and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level tests. We created and evaluated a generic educational brochure and tested it through patient focus groups. Materials were also reviewed for proposed content based on recommendation from professional organizations. ResultsWe evaluated educational materials from Ariosa Diagnostics, Sequenom CMM, and Verinata, as well as our generic brochure. Only the generic brochure was rated ‘acceptable’ in literacy (Table 1) and material from the commercial companies was found to be lacking in all or some content areas (Table 2). Critiques from focus groups of six pregnant women from the greater Providence, RI region were constructive, including adding more information about trisomies 18 and 13, providing a realistic miscarriage risk, and providing further information about cost and insurance coverage. The new material created by our group had complete information in all recommended content areas. We evaluated educational materials from Ariosa Diagnostics, Sequenom CMM, and Verinata, as well as our generic brochure. Only the generic brochure was rated ‘acceptable’ in literacy (Table 1) and material from the commercial companies was found to be lacking in all or some content areas (Table 2). Critiques from focus groups of six pregnant women from the greater Providence, RI region were constructive, including adding more information about trisomies 18 and 13, providing a realistic miscarriage risk, and providing further information about cost and insurance coverage. The new material created by our group had complete information in all recommended content areas. ConclusionTables 1 and 2