Prospects for Expansion of Universal Newborn Screening in Bulgaria: A Survey among Medical Professionals
-
Published:2023-10-11
Issue:4
Volume:9
Page:57
-
ISSN:2409-515X
-
Container-title:International Journal of Neonatal Screening
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:IJNS
Author:
Iskrov Georgi12ORCID, Angelova Vyara3, Bochev Boyan3, Valchinova Vaska3, Gencheva Teodora3, Dzhuleva Desislava3, Dichev Julian3, Nedkova Tanya3, Palkova Mariya3, Tyutyukova Anelia3, Hristova Maria3, Hristova-Atanasova Eleonora12ORCID, Stefanov Rumen12
Affiliation:
1. Department of Social Medicine and Public Health, Faculty of Public Health, Medical University of Plovdiv, 15A Vasil Aprilov Blvd., 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria 2. Institute for Rare Diseases, 22 Maestro G. Atanasov St., 4017 Plovdiv, Bulgaria 3. Faculty of Medicine, Medical University of Plovdiv, 15A Vasil Aprilov Blvd., 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria
Abstract
Determining the scope of a newborn screening program is a challenging health policy issue. Our study aimed to explore the attitudes of specialists in pediatrics, neonatology, medical genetics, and biochemistry regarding the prospects for expanding the panel of diseases for universal newborn screening in Bulgaria. We conducted an online survey in March–May 2022. The questionnaire listed 35 disorders that could potentially be included in the Bulgarian panel for universal newborn screening. If endorsing a specific condition, participants had to justify their position by judging its performance against the ten principles of Wilson and Jungner. We found a high degree of knowledge about the current universal newborn screening program in Bulgaria. An overwhelming majority (97.4%) supported the expansion of the panel to include more conditions. Four disorders obtained more than 50% approval for inclusion: cystic fibrosis (87.0%), thalassemia (72.7%), spinal muscular atrophy (65.6%), and classical galactosemia (59.1%). The perception of the condition as an important health problem was the most significant factor in this support. The costs of diagnosis and treatment appeared to be the main source of concern. We recommend country-specific economic evaluations and research on the views of other stakeholders, including the government, payers, and patient organizations, to better understand and manage the complex nature of newborn screening policymaking.
Subject
Obstetrics and Gynecology,Immunology and Microbiology (miscellaneous),Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health
Reference48 articles.
1. Sikonja, J., Groselj, U., Scarpa, M., la Marca, G., Cheillan, D., Kölker, S., Zetterström, R.H., Kožich, V., Le Cam, Y., and Gumus, G. (2022). Towards Achieving Equity and Innovation in Newborn Screening across Europe. Int. J. Neonatal Screen., 8. 2. Current Status of Newborn Screening in Southeastern Europe;Koracin;Front. Pediatr.,2021 3. Loeber, J.G. (2018). European Union Should Actively Stimulate and Harmonise Neonatal Screening Initiatives. Int. J. Neonatal Screen., 4. 4. Wilson, J.M.G., and Jungner, G. (1968). Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease, WHO. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/37650. 5. Half a Century of Wilson & Jungner: Reflections on the Governance of Population Screening;Sturdy;Wellcome Open Res.,2020
|
|