Inequalities in uptake of prenatal screening according to ethnicity and socio‐economic status in the four largest cities of the Netherlands (2011–2013)†. (14th August 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Posthumus, Anke G.; Peters, Ingrid A.; Borsboom, Gerard J.; Knapen, Maarten F. C. M.; Bonsel, Gouke J.
• Is Part Of: Prenatal diagnosis. Volume 37:Number 10(2017)
• Page Start: 959
• Page End: 967
• Publication Date: 2017-08-14
• Subjects: Prenatal diagnosis -- Periodicals; Fetus -- Diseases -- Diagnosis -- Periodicals; Electronic journals; 618.32075
• DOI: 10.1002/pd.5089
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0197-3851

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: In the Netherlands, all women are claimed to have equal access to prenatal screening (PS). Prior research demonstrated substantial inequalities in PS uptake associated with socioeconomic status (SES) and ethnic background. The suggested pathway was a lack of intention to participate in PS among these subgroups. We studied the background of inequalities in PS participation, challenging intention heterogeneity as the single explanation. Methods: Multivariable logistic regression analyses of the national PS registry, focusing on the four largest cities in the Netherlands ( n = 4578, years 2011–2013), stratified by SES. Outcome measures: (1) any uptake of PS (yes/no) and (2) uptake (one/two tests) for women who intended to participate in two tests. Determinants included intention, ethnicity, practice, and age. Results: Of non‐Western women, 85.7% were screened versus 89.7% of Western women. Intention was an important explanatory factor in all models. However, after correction for intention, ethnicity remained a significant determinant for differences in uptake. Ethnicity and SES also interacted, indicating that non‐Western women in low SES areas had the lowest uptake (corrected for intention). Conclusions for Practice: Socioeconomic status and ethnicity related inequalities in PS uptake are only partially explained by intention heterogeneity; other pathways, in particular provider‐related determinants, may play a role. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Abstract : What's already known about this topic? Inequalities associated with socioeconomic status (SES) and ethnic background exist in the uptake of prenatal screening tests (PS). The suggested pathway was a lack of intention to participate in PS amongst these groups. What does this study add? After correction for the intention to participate in PS, ethnicity remained a significant determinant for differences in uptake of PS. Ethnicity (and socioeconomic status) related inequalities in the uptake of PS are only partially related to heterogeneity in the intention to participate in PS; other pathways, in particular provider‐related determinants, may play a role.