Do most people do the quad screen or no?

ML* · November 2010

Just wondering. I think we did it last time but not sure how we made the decision-- seems like forever ago. I couldnt find any info on Google about what percent of pregnant women actually do it.

KYmama9286 · November 2010

I think it is just personal opinion--we opted out of doing it b/c we figured 1) it is not a guaranteed diagnosis-- it just shows if the baby possibly has a higher risk of having xyz, 2) even if it showed that our son had a higher risk we didnt want the stress of worrying about it during the pregnancy, we figured there are enough other things to worry about that we didnt want to add in the extra worry that would come on delivery day thinking that there might be something especially when you could do all that worrying for nothing and the baby could end up perfectly fine

That being said we also opted out of amnio's when they were offered when I was in the hospital and we were told there was a risk of DS having Downs-- we knew that it wouldnt affect how we felt about DS and it wouldnt change anything treatment wise during the rest of my pregnancy so we figured we would rather deal with that when it was time to deal with it (meaning once DS was here)

I know some women would rather know ahead of time to mentally prepare themselves so its not such a shock at delivery which is understandable also and some like having it done b/c if everything comes back normal it can be somewhat of a relief. My understanding though is that even if it comes back fine (w/ no markers for anything) that doesnt necessarily mean that your child still couldnt end up having xyz so getting a normal result for me wouldnt be any sort of relief if that makes any sense--I think your decision would be based on are you the type of personality who would want to know ahead of time to prepare or deal with it when it happens? GL either way!

jerseygirl81 · November 2010

I agree that it's a very personal decision. We decided to do all of the non-invasive screening tests that were offered, including the NT scan and the quad screen. If any of the results had come back showing an elevated risk, we would have gone ahead and done the amnio. I think we're in the minority on that, but that was our agreement. Of course, like pp said, a low-risk result doesn't mean no problems.

MrsMoher · November 2010

skyllingstadl:

I think it is just personal opinion--we opted out of doing it b/c we figured 1) it is not a guaranteed diagnosis-- it just shows if the baby possibly has a higher risk of having xyz, 2) even if it showed that our son had a higher risk we didnt want the stress of worrying about it during the pregnancy, we figured there are enough other things to worry about that we didnt want to add in the extra worry that would come on delivery day thinking that there might be something especially when you could do all that worrying for nothing and the baby could end up perfectly fine

This exactly. Plus DH is a worrier and he doesn't need anything to back up his worrying... he wouldn't sleep if there was fuel added to the fire. He told me after I delivered Eli he kept dreaming of tiny baby sized white coffins while I was pg. He doesn't need anything to help those thoughts out. KWIM?

stillwaiting12 · November 2010

I did all of the testing that was offered to me. I am type A and I am the type who needs to know everything I possibly can. The main reason for me was IF there was something that did come back with an elevated risk I wanted to be prepared. I was delivering at Anderson Mercy and if I had known my child has a risk of A, B or C I could have made arrangements to deliver at Good Sam if need be.

jerseygirl81 · November 2010

MrsMoher:
This exactly. Plus DH is a worrier and he doesn't need anything to back up his worrying... he wouldn't sleep if there was fuel added to the fire. He told me after I delivered Eli he kept dreaming of tiny baby sized white coffins while I was pg. He doesn't need anything to help those thoughts out. KWIM?

See, this is exactly why I DID do the screenings, so I guess the worry argument could play out for both sides. If we have a second child I'm strongly considering the CSV from the start because I was worried and anxious the entire time I was pregnant. For me it was pretty unbearable and I was a miserable pregnant lady. The low-risk results made me feel a little bit better.

Superchicy · November 2010

I did the NST but not the blood test. After talking with my doctor, and seeing nothing on the NST that indicated something was wrong, I decided against the blood test. If the NST had shown the possibility of Downs or some other issue, I probably would have opted for the blood test. Amnio though I think I'd have to decide based on what the issue was and how severe since there is risk to the baby for that. Like pp all said, it's a very personal decision.

kyfirewife · November 2010

We didn't do it.

Our Ob informed us that the number of false positives is really high, and that even if any of them come back positive, it doesn't effect your care thru your pregnancy or L&D.

So we chose not to.

jerseygirl81 · November 2010

kyfirewife:
We didn't do it.

Our Ob informed us that the number of false positives is really high, and that even if any of them come back positive, it doesn't effect your care thru your pregnancy or L&D.

So we chose not to.

I think this is the terminology that turns a lot of people off - "false positive" and "false negative." The tests don't give you a positive or negative result, they give you a set of probabilities. So yes, it's true that you can get a high risk result and then have no problems, because all it's telling you is that you're at a higher risk than the general population.

Moesten · November 2010

Just an FYI, there is now a Penta screen available. They have added an additional (5th) marker, hence the name change. Used to be Triple screen, then a quad, now a penta.

But you can still opt for just a quad screen (at least they offered that or the penta to me in my last pregnancy).

But as Jersey stated, this is just a screening, it is not a diagnostic test. The results are probabilities/relative risk readings, not certainties. Be that as it may, we always opted for testing.

Lyons_in_2007 · November 2010

jerseygirl81:
I agree that it's a very personal decision. We decided to do all of the non-invasive screening tests that were offered, including the NT scan and the quad screen. If any of the results had come back showing an elevated risk, we would have gone ahead and done the amnio. I think we're in the minority on that, but that was our agreement. Of course, like pp said, a low-risk result doesn't mean no problems.

This. We opted for all of the same non-invasive screenings, especially since they were covered 100% by our insurance policy.

shawnsweetie · November 2010

We opted out of all of them.

Lyons_in_2007 · November 2010

jerseygirl81:

kyfirewife:
We didn't do it.

Our Ob informed us that the number of false positives is really high, and that even if any of them come back positive, it doesn't effect your care thru your pregnancy or L&D.

So we chose not to.

I think this is the terminology that turns a lot of people off - "false positive" and "false negative." The tests don't give you a positive or negative result, they give you a set of probabilities. So yes, it's true that you can get a high risk result and then have no problems, because all it's telling you is that you're at a higher risk than the general population.

Exactly.

curlypie1 · November 2010

We didn't. I don't feel strongly about it either way, I just didn't feel it was necessary for us.

cops_wife · November 2010

We did not for a number of reasons, one of which was that it would not have been covered by insurance, so that's something to look into.

JenRose05 · November 2010

I did them both times. I've said this before but my twin sisters (yes both) were born with downs syndrome and she didnt find out until the day because the testing wasnt available back then. She always says it never changed her view of her children and she loved them from the minute they were born, she is also disabled (100% deaf) so she knew the struggles. However she has ALWAYS told me she wished she had known prior so she could be prepared emotionally. Its a huge thing to find out all at once. Evenutally she found mom groups and organizations that helped her learn thank goodness!

addslove · November 2010

We didn't and I had to sign a waiver saying I declined them...which I found kind of odd.

Lauren&Joe · November 2010

We really debated back and forth and end up deciding to do them. In hindsight, I'm really glad we did. We were scheduled for our 20 week ultrasound at 17 1/2 weeks, which was pretty early. In that ultrasound they thought they saw something in the baby's brain that could have been one of the Trisimony's. (sp.) We ended up having to do a level 2 ultrasound and our little girl was checked out from head to toe. In the end she's perfectly healthy and it was just because she was so little that they had us come in and look at her more closely. They couldn't really tell what they were looking at because of her age. But the piece of mind that came from our test results was really worth it. We tested at a VERY low risk for the defects. So we knew going into the second ultrasound that the chances of her having the defect was pretty low, and this was really more precautionary. That made the roughly 2 week wait between ultrasounds slightly more tolerable.

brown_bride07 · November 2010

We did the screening. Its a personal decision. I would have worried whether we did it or not.

Meg41208 · November 2010

I opted out of it when it was first offered. However, I regretted that decision after my 20 week u/s because K had a couple of soft markers that, with the screening, could have been ruled out as anything serious. The MFM that read the u/s was a total hag and was pressuring us to get an amnio on the spot, which was really scary. I did end up getting the quad screen at that point, but the few days of worrying before the results came back were agonizing. The quad screen came back completely normal - which was a huge relief.

Based on my experience, I am going to get the quad screen with future children. I don't think that the incidence of "false positives" is as high as bump lore and a lot of OBs make women think. Who has actually had a high probability on the screening and had it turn out to be a false alarm.

Do most people do the quad screen or no?

Re: Do most people do the quad screen or no?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards