A population-based cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier screening program was introduced in Victoria, Australia in 2006, and was offered to couples planning a pregnancy or in early pregnancy for a fee. Individuals received pre-test advice from their doctor and through a brochure. Carriers identified received genetic counseling. The aim of this study was to assess the attitudes of people undertaking screening. Between January 2006 and June 2008 all carriers (n = 79) and a randomly selected cohort of non-carriers (n = 162) were invited to participate. A purpose-designed questionnaire explored the following domains: knowledge, recollection and meaning of carrier status, reasons for having screening, anxiety and communication of results to family members. Forty-seven carriers (62%) and 65 non-carriers (41%) returned the questionnaire. Most participants were female (97%) aged 35–39 (46%). The main reasons for choosing screening were the perception of CF as a severe condition and a doctor’s recommendation. All carriers correctly recalled their carrier status and the risk of having a child with CF, while 3 non-carriers (4.7%) were unsure of their carrier status and 12 (22%) incorrectly recalled their residual risk. Carriers answered the knowledge questions correctly more often than non-carriers. There was no difference in anxiety between carriers and non-carriers. The majority of carriers informed relatives of their increased risk of being a carrier. We conclude that participants’ attitude towards carrier screening for CF was generally very positive. Our model of screening could be applied on a larger scale.

1.
Massie J, Olsen M, Glazner J, Robertson CF, Francis I: Newborn screening for cystic fibrosis in Victoria: 10 years’ experience (1989–1998). Med J Aust 2000;172:584–587.
2.
Collins V, Williamson R: Providing services for families with a genetic condition: a contrast between cystic fibrosis and Down syndrome. Pediatrics 2003;112:1177–1180.
3.
Rowe SM, Miller S, Sorscher EJ: Cystic fibrosis. New Engl J Med 2005;352:1992–2001.
4.
Elborn JS, Shale DJ, Britton JR: Cystic fibrosis: current survival and population estimates to the year 2000. Thorax 1991;46:881–885.
5.
Boulton M, Cummings C, Williamson R: The views of general practitioners on community carrier screening for cystic fibrosis. Br J Gen Pract 1996;46:299–301.
6.
Grody WW, Cutting GR, Klinger KW, Richards SC, Watson MS, Desnick RJ: Laboratory standards and guidelines for populationbased cystic fibrosis carrier screening. Genet Med 2001;3:149–154.
7.
Massie J, Delatycki MB, Bankier A: Screening couples for cystic fibrosis carrier status: why are we waiting? Med J Aust 2005;183:501–502.
8.
Honnor M, Zubrick SR, Walpole I, Bower C, Goldblatt J: Population screening for cystic fibrosis in Western Australia: community response. Am J Med Genet 2000;93:198–204.
9.
Wake SA, Rogers CJ, Colley PW, Hieatt EA, Jenner CF, Turner GM: Cystic fibrosis carrier screening in two New South Wales country towns. Med J Aust 1996;164:471–474.
10.
Czaja R, Blair J: Designing Surveys: A Guide to Decisions and Procedures, ed 2. Thousand Oaks, Print Forge Press, 2005.
11.
Gason AA, Metcalfe SA, Delatycki MB, Petrou V, Sheffield E, Bankier A, Aitken M: Tay Sachs disease carrier screening in schools: educational alternatives and cheekbrush sampling. Genet Med 2005;7:626–632.
12.
Marteau TM, Bekker H: The development of a six-item short-form of the state scale of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Br J Clin Psychol 1992;31:301–306.
13.
Clayton EW, Hannig VL, Pfotenhauer JP, Parker RA, Campbell PW 3rd, Phillips JA 3rd: Lack of interest by nonpregnant couples in population-based cystic fibrosis carrier screening. Am J Hum Genet 1996;58:617–627.
14.
McClaren BJ, Delatycki MB, Collins V, Metcalfe SA, Aitken M: ‘It is not in my world’: an exploration of attitudes and influences associated with cystic fibrosis carrier screening. Eur J Hum Genet 2008;16:435–444.
15.
Wald NJ, George L, Wald N, MacKenzie IZ: Further observations in connection with couple screening for cystic fibrosis. Prenat Diagn 1995;15:589–590.
16.
Fang CY, Dunkel-Schetter C, Tatsugawa ZH, Fox MA, Bass HN, Crandall BF, Grody WW: Attitudes toward genetic carrier screening for cystic fibrosis among pregnant women: the role of health beliefs and avoidant coping style. Womens Health 1997;3:31–51.
17.
Henneman L, Bramsen I, van der Ploeg HM, Ader HJ, van der Horst HE, Gille JJ, ten Kate LP: Participation in preconceptional carrier couple screening: characteristics, attitudes, and knowledge of both partners. J Med Genet 2001;38:695–703.
18.
McClaren BJ, Aitken M, Massie J, Metcalfe SA, Amor DJ: Cascade carrier testing for cystic fibrosis: an Australian experience. Abstracts of the 31st European Cystic Fibrosis Conference. J Cyst Fibros 2008;7:S2.
19.
Levenkron JC, Loader S, Rowley PT: Carrier screening for cystic fibrosis: test acceptance and one year follow-up. Am J Med Genet 1997;73:378–386.
20.
Botkin JR, Alemagno S: Carrier screening for cystic fibrosis: a pilot study of the attitudes of pregnant women. Am J Public Health 1992;82:723–725.
21.
Watson EK, Marchant J, Bush A, Williamson B: Attitudes towards prenatal diagnosis and carrier screening for cystic fibrosis among the parents of patients in a paediatric cystic fibrosis clinic. J Med Genet 1992;29:490–491.
22.
Henneman L, Bramsen I, van der Ploeg HM, ten Kate LP: Preconception cystic fibrosis carrier couple screening: impact, understanding, and satisfaction. Genet Test 2002;6:195–203.
23.
Ormond KE, Mills PL, Lester LA, Ross LF: Effect of family history on disclosure patterns of cystic fibrosis carrier status. Am J Med Genet 2003;119:70–77.
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.