PEDIATRICS Vol. 106 No. 2 Supplement August 2000, pp. 386-388
Serving the Family From Birth to the Medical Home:
Newborn Screening: A Blueprint for the Future
Executive Summary: Newborn Screening Task Force
Report
Approximately 4 million infants are born yearly in the United
States (US), and are screened to detect conditions that threaten their
life and long-term health. Newborn screening is a public health
activity aimed at the early identification of infants who are affected
by certain genetic/metabolic/infectious conditions. Early
identification of these conditions is particularly crucial, as timely
intervention can lead to a significant reduction of morbidity,
mortality, and associated disabilities in affected infants.
Newborn screening has been universally accepted for the past 3 decades.
It represented the first population-based genetic screening program,
and signaled the integration of genetic testing into public health
programs. Today, advances in technology are making possible new forms
of newborn screening programs, such as newborn hearing screening. These
technological advances will continue to have a significant impact on
the sensitivity, specificity, and scope of newborn screening programs,
including newborn heelstick screening.
Challenges are anticipated with technological advances. It is likely
that public pressure to deploy new diagnostic capabilities, such as
DNA-based technology, will increase despite limited knowledge of
potential risks and benefits. In addition, the ability to detect individuals with conditions for which there is no effective or necessary treatment is likely. Further, as the Human Genome Project is
completed, the impetus and opportunity for the transition of genetic
technology into practice will increase. These and other challenges will
affect not only newborn screening tests, but also the entire
newborn screening system, which includes short-term follow-up,
diagnosis, treatment/management, and evaluation. Inherent to each of
these components is an education process. A national dialogue and
process is needed to support state newborn screening systems as they
try to keep pace with new technology.
To address these and other issues, a national Task Force on Newborn
Screening (Task Force) was convened by the American Academy of
Pediatrics (AAP) with funding from and at the request of the Maternal
and Child Health Bureau (MCHB), Health Resources and Services
Administration (HRSA), US Department of Health and Human Services
(HHS). The AAP was asked to convene the Task Force in recognition that
pediatricians and other primary care health professionals must take a
lead in partnering with public health organizations to examine the many
issues that have arisen around the state newborn screening programs.
To ensure that children who are screened are linked to a medical home,
it was essential that pediatricians and other primary care health
professionals be involved. The AAP defines the medical home as care
that is accessible, family-centered, continuous, comprehensive,
coordinated, compassionate, and culturally competent. A child who has a
medical home has a pediatrician or other primary care health
professional who is working in partnership with the child's family to
ensure that all medical, nonmedical, psychosocial, and educational
needs of the child and family are met in the local community.
Task Force members were appointed to represent many perspectives among
those who operate programs, conduct research, and are affected by
newborn screening systems. The co-sponsors of this effort were: other
HHS agencies including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ); the Genetic Alliance, which is
a consortium of consumer groups; and national public health
organizations including the Association of State and Territorial Health
Officials, the Association of Maternal and Child Health Programs, and
the Association of Public Health Laboratories. This report has been
approved by the AAP Board of Directors. It does not necessarily reflect
the viewpoints of sponsoring organizations or the organizations
represented by members of the Task Force.
The purpose of the Task Force was to review issues and challenges for
state newborn screening systems. The review process was structured to
further expand representation. Task Force members were divided into 5 work groups, and additional individuals were invited to participate in
each work group's examination of key issues. Over the course of 6 months, questions, concerns, and issues were collected from state
public health agencies, state public health laboratory directors,
maternal and child health programs, pediatricians, and other primary
care health professionals who care for children, families and other
consumers, bioethicists, scientists, and health services researchers.
Each work group formulated conclusions and developed consensus
recommendations. On May 10-11, 1999, the Task Force heard
presentations from the 5 work groups, along with public comment on the
reports and recommendations. A set of recommendations was developed
incorporating key elements of the work group reports, issues raised by
the public, and other related information. This document summarizes the
Task Force recommendations.
The Task Force has outlined a national agenda for strengthening each
"state" newborn screening system. ("State" newborn screening systems refer to state and territorial programs for heelstick newborn
screening.) The Task Force believes that public health agencies
(federal and state), in partnership with health professionals and
consumers, should continue to:
| |
KEY RECOMMENDATIONS |
|---|
I. Effective Newborn Screening Systems Require an Adequate Public Health Infrastructure and Must Be Integrated With the Health Care Delivery System
- Federal agencies must take action to strengthen the public health infrastructure for newborn screening.
The federal government
acting through the HRSA,
CDC, Health Care Financing Agency (HCFA), AHRQ, NIH, and other
agencies
should collaborate to provide ongoing leadership and support
for development of newborn screening standards, guidelines, and
policies.
As the federal unit with most responsibility for
newborn screening system development, the HRSA should engage in a
national process involving government, professionals, and consumers to advance the recommendations of this Task Force and assist in the development and implementation of nationally recognized newborn screening system standards and policies.
Federal resources should be identified to sustain a
Newborn Screening Quality Assurance Program to assist state public health laboratories. Such assistance must be both sustained and expanded as states adopt new screening technologies and modalities.
The HRSA's MCHB should strengthen current mechanisms
to improve coordination of infant health programs and initiatives within the state and/or between states, including continuation of
funding in support of newborn screening program reviews.
- State public health agencies should direct their newborn screening program to be consistent with professional guidelines and recommendations. Each state public health agency should take responsibility for systems development. Specifically, states and their agencies have responsibility to:
Design and coordinate the newborn screening system;
Adhere to nationally recognized recommendations and
standards for the validity and utility of tests. State newborn
screening systems have a responsibility to review the appropriateness
of existing tests, tests for additional conditions, and new screening technology and modalities; and
Adopt standards for laboratories, health
professionals, and health care financing plans based on nationally
recognized standards and guidelines for follow-up, diagnosis, and
treatment.
- State public health agencies, working under legislative authority, have the ongoing responsibility to ensure quality and evaluate program effort. States and their state public health agencies should:
Maintain a newborn screening system that has
appropriate evaluation, performance monitoring, and quality assurance
activities from initial screening, through follow-up, diagnosis,
treatment, and services through adolescence and adulthood;
Conduct oversight of program operations, including
those outside the public health agency, such as test analysis and
tracking, private sector collection and transmission of screening data, laboratory quality, and the quality of the diagnostic procedures and
treatment programs at pediatric subspecialty clinics; and
Monitor and evaluate program performance through
collection, assembly, analysis, and reporting of data, including
outcome evaluations.
- States and state public health agencies should implement mechanisms to inform and involve health professionals and the public. Each state should:
Develop a program advisory board that is
multidisciplinary, involves pediatricians and other primary care health
professionals who provide medical homes for children, pediatric
subspecialists, and has meaningful representation of families and the
general public; and
Design and implement public, professional, and parent
education efforts regarding newborn screening.
- States and state public health agencies should provide support for
coordination and integration of program activities, including information and services. This will require public
private,
federal
state, and intrastate partnerships. States should:
Use public and private resources to fund
demonstration programs that can serve as a testing ground for linking
information and services in ways that improve the newborn screening
system; and
Structure interagency coordination to maximize
resources and to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of newborn
screening systems.
II. Public Health Agencies Must Involve Health Professionals, Families, and the General Public in the Development, Operation, and Oversight of Newborn Screening Systems
- The pediatrician or primary care health professional who, in partnership with parents, is the source of the child's medical home, should:
Ensure that all newborns admitted to their practice
have received adequate newborn screening, and that appropriate
documentation of testing is present;
Follow positive screening results to diagnosis (ie,
confirmed or excluded), including repeated screening and diagnostic testing;
Coordinate a seamless system of care with pediatric
subspecialty clinics, tertiary care centers, and/or community-based providers, when a child is diagnosed with a disorder through newborn screening;
Maintain a central record and database containing all
pertinent medical information about the child. This record should be
accessible to the family and others involved in the child's care, but
confidentiality must be ensured; and
Assist the family in understanding the diagnosis,
symptoms, and potential implications of a diagnosed genetic/metabolic condition, as well as the availability of genetic counseling, family
testing, and other family support services.
- Parents should receive information (on behalf of their children) about newborn screening.
Prospective parents should receive information
about newborn screening during the prenatal period. Pregnant women
should be made aware of the process and benefits of newborn screening and their right of refusal before testing, preferably during a routine
third trimester prenatal care visit.
Parent knowledge should be reinforced after delivery
by educational materials and discussion as needed by the infant's pediatrician or primary care health professional and/or knowledgeable hospital staff.
Prenatal health care professionals as well as the
infant's primary care health professional should be knowledgeable
about their state's newborn screening program through educational
efforts coordinated by the state's newborn screening program in
conjunction with a newborn screening advisory body.
- Written documentation of consent is not required for the majority of newborn screening tests, for example, those tests of proven validity and utility.
Parents should always be informed of testing and
have the opportunity to refuse testing.
If after discussions about newborn screening with
health professionals, parents refuse to have their newborn tested, this refusal should be documented in writing and honored.
If a newborn screening test is investigational or in
the process of being developed, the benefits or potential risks have yet to be demonstrated, and identifiers are not removed from the specimen, informed consent should be obtained from parents and documented.
- Studies should be performed to broaden understanding of the ways in which communication can be performed more effectively for the benefit of consumers.
Pilot studies and evaluation research should be
conducted to assess the potential impact of revised parental permission and informed decision-making policies.
Each state or region should, with input from families
who have children with special needs and/or parent information centers, develop and provide family educational materials about newborn screening.
Evaluation of materials should be ongoing,
particularly because of the changing demographics of childbearing,
cultural changes, and rapid developments in genetic science.
- Parents have a right to confidentiality and privacy protections for the medical and genetic information in any type of newborn screening results. Based on nationally recognized standards and guidelines, each state should have appropriate policies and mechanisms in place to ensure families' privacy and confidentiality. Laws to guarantee genetic privacy and protect against genetic discrimination should benefit patients identified by newborn screening.
- States and the federal government should include public participation in medical policy-making. The Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing provides a mechanism for public participation in genetic policy development at the federal level. Each state should establish and fund a newborn screening advisory body with public participation to advise on newborn screening policy developments.
Such an entity should include a broad range of
public advisors representing parents, health professionals, third-party payers, appropriate government agencies, and other concerned citizens.
Such an entity should be empowered to advise state
officials about screening for particular conditions based on accepted standards and be consulted about the development of related state regulations.
Such an entity should be involved in the review of new
tests under consideration by the state and in the development of pilot
programs for new tests.
Such an entity should be involved in the ongoing
evaluation of all aspects of the state's process for newborn
screening. Oversight activities should include a review of: testing,
follow-up, and treatment efforts; the impact on families of receiving a
false-positive screening result; and the state's process for handling
consumer input including grievances.
III. Public Health Agencies Must Ensure Adequate Infrastructure and Policies for Surveillance and Research Related to Newborn Screening
- State Maternal and Child Health (MCH) programs should conduct a review of the newborn screening system and its relationship to the HRSA MCH Block Grant Performance Measures and evaluate the quality of data of the newborn screening-related performance measures.
- The federal HCFA should develop Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS) measures to evaluate the health plans' performance within the newborn screening system.
- A federally-funded newborn screening research agenda should be outlined that aims to: develop better tests (more sensitive, more specific, and less costly); assess the validity and utility of new technologies (eg, tandem mass spectrometry, DNA-based testing, and other evolving technologies); and define appropriate uses of residual biologic samples for population-based research and surveillance.
- The HRSA's MCHB should provide grants to states to stimulate development of newborn screening information systems, with a focus on newborn screening systems that are connected to the medical home, newborn screening system process and outcome evaluation, development of standardized data sets, analyses of cost-efficiency and effectiveness, and integration with other public health data systems. Support for technological innovation (ie, new test technologies) should include these measures.
- Pediatricians, pediatric subspecialists, and other health professionals who care for children should contribute to newborn screening data collection to advance knowledge about health outcomes and intervention effectiveness. Professional associations, the HRSA-funded National Newborn Screening and Genetics Resource Center, and state newborn screening programs should develop strategies to assist health professionals in their efforts to participate in and learn from newborn screening information systems.
- Pilot studies should be undertaken to demonstrate the safety, effectiveness, validity, and clinical utility of tests for additional conditions and new testing modalities. Informed consent of parents is called for in all such pilot studies. These studies might be undertaken by individual states, regional or nationwide groups of states, or through federal grants provided to research institutions across the country.
- Federal and state public health agencies, in partnership with health professionals, families, and representatives of ethnic, minority, and other diverse communities should:
Develop model legislation and/or regulation that
articulates policies and procedures regarding utilization of unlinked and identifiable residual samples for research and public health surveillance. This process should include review and
consideration of the recent recommendations to the President set
forth by the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) for research
involving human biological materials;
Develop model consent forms and informational
materials for parental permission for retention and use of newborn
screening samples;
Develop educational materials for parents that
includes information regarding the storage and uses of residual
samples;
Organize collaborative efforts to develop minimum
standards for storage and database technology to facilitate appropriate storage of residual newborn screening blood samples at the state level;
and
Consider creating a national or multi-state
population-based specimen resource for research in which consent is
obtained from the individuals from whom the tissue is obtained. Such a resource could be an alternative to retaining newborn screening samples
for potential use in research.
- Using national recommendations, each State program should develop and implement policies and procedures for retention of residual newborn screening blood samples that articulate the rationale and objectives for storage, the intended duration of storage, whether storage is with or without identifiers, and guidelines for use of identifiable and unlinked samples. An advisory group for newborn screening programs with broad health professional and family/community representation is a valuable resource in developing policies and procedures and in reviewing applications for use of retained samples. The advisory body also could determine priorities for use.
IV. Public Health Agencies Should Ensure Adequate Financing Mechanisms to Support a Newborn Screening Program
- States should ensure adequate financing of all parts of the newborn screening system: screening, short-term follow-up, diagnostic testing, comprehensive medical care/treatment, and evaluation of the system. If newborn screening fees are not adequate, funding of all components of the system could be accomplished with other public health dollars or by third-party payers. Other uses of newborn screening fees should not be considered until all of the components of the newborn screening system are fully funded.
- States should take responsibility for blending resources available through Title XIX (Medicaid), Title V (MCH Block Grant), Title XXI (State Children's Health Insurance Program) [SCHIP], and private insurance to guarantee necessary coverage and financing for all children and adolescents with a condition diagnosed through the newborn screening system.
- State contracts for publicly-subsidized third-party insurance plans that cover children (eg, Medicaid and SCHIP) should explicitly require coverage for newborn screening and those services and treatment related to disorders identified by newborn screening. State contracts also should require that third-party payers ensure access to health care professionals with appropriate pediatric expertise within the network or through out-of-network referrals.
- States, in cooperation with health professionals and payers, should put mechanisms in place to identify the third-party payers for newborns immediately following birth. For example, all states should operationalize the automatic newborn eligibility requirements under Medicaid and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) newborn coverage provisions that require infant coverage and prohibit preexisting condition exclusions for newborns.
- Purchasers
public and private
should ensure that the benefits package
they pay for includes the care and services defined by the AAP Scope of
Health Care Benefits Statement and the Council of Regional
Networks for Genetic Services Guidelines.
- In the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, the federal government should review the technical appropriateness of guidelines, and evaluate the consistency of their application, for children with conditions identified through newborn screening.
Pediatrics (ISSN 0031 4005). Copyright ©2000 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
I. Baussano, I. Tardivo, R. Bellezza-Fontana, M. P. Forneris, A. Lezo, L. Anfossi, M. Castello, V. Aleksandar, and E. Bignamini Neonatal Screening for Cystic Fibrosis Does Not Affect Time to First Infection With Pseudomonas aeruginosa Pediatrics, September 1, 2006; 118(3): 888 - 895. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. A. Tarini, D. A. Christakis, and H. G. Welch State Newborn Screening in the Tandem Mass Spectrometry Era: More Tests, More False-Positive Results Pediatrics, August 1, 2006; 118(2): 448 - 456. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Solmone, E. Girardi, F. Costa, L. Pucillo, G. Ippolito, and M. R. Capobianchi Simple and Reliable Method for Detection and Genotyping of Hepatitis C Virus RNA in Dried Blood Spots Stored at Room Temperature J. Clin. Microbiol., September 1, 2002; 40(9): 3512 - 3514. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Committee on Bioethics Ethical Issues With Genetic Testing in Pediatrics Pediatrics, June 1, 2001; 107(6): 1451 - 1455. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||






