Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (9)

Search Parameters:
Authors = Amy Gaviglio

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
10 pages, 208 KiB  
Guidelines
ISNS General Guidelines for Neonatal Bloodspot Screening 2025
by Dianne Webster, Amy Gaviglio, Aysha Habib Khan, Mei Baker, David Cheillan, Layachi Chabraoui, Ghassan Abdoh, Juan Cabello, Roberto Giugliani, Dimitris Platis, Jan Østrup, R. Rodney Howell, Peter C. J. I. Schielen and James R. Bonham
Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2025, 11(2), 45; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns11020045 - 14 Jun 2025
Viewed by 1110
Abstract
Part of the vision of the ISNS is ‘to enhance the quality of neonatal screening and medical services through dissemination of information, guidelines and best practices.’ Although newborn screening encompasses testing in the newborn period for critical congenital heart disease, hearing impairment, birth [...] Read more.
Part of the vision of the ISNS is ‘to enhance the quality of neonatal screening and medical services through dissemination of information, guidelines and best practices.’ Although newborn screening encompasses testing in the newborn period for critical congenital heart disease, hearing impairment, birth defects, and congenital biochemical disorders (usually on bloodspots), this guideline is specifically about bloodspot screening. The ISNS has provided neonatal screening guidelines for many years and here presents the renewed 2025 General Guidelines for Neonatal Bloodspot Screening. They are intended to provide a framework for screening programs to develop specific policies around all aspects of the newborn screening system, offering the basic set of items for consideration. These guidelines provide trusted anchors to build, expand, or maintain robustly organized neonatal or newborn screening (NBS) programs and a checklist to evaluate and improve the essential elements of those programs. For starting or developing programs, it is a set of elements for which provisions need to be in place and a checklist of items that the screening program should at a minimum have provisions for. The publication of these guidelines is meant as a starting point for interactive discussion, to further improve this document and expand where necessary. Full article
10 pages, 739 KiB  
Article
Participatory Workflow Analysis of Newborn Genetic Screening (NBS) to Support Tools for Improved Follow-Up: Comparing the Use Case of Hemoglobinopathy Traits Across U.S. States
by Peter Taber, Jennifer Baysinger, Sierra Daniels, Natalie Diaz-Kincaid, Amy Gaviglio, Jacob Ginter, Patrice K. Held, Emily Reeves, Virginia Sack, Jennifer Weaver and Karen Eilbeck
Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2025, 11(2), 40; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns11020040 - 20 May 2025
Viewed by 588
Abstract
Communication of newborn screening (NBS) results often fails to provide clear explanations of NBS screen results to parents. Understanding existing NBS workflows is vital for improving NBS follow-up. We sought to describe a diverse range of state NBS programs as a starting point [...] Read more.
Communication of newborn screening (NBS) results often fails to provide clear explanations of NBS screen results to parents. Understanding existing NBS workflows is vital for improving NBS follow-up. We sought to describe a diverse range of state NBS programs as a starting point for designing tools to improve NBS follow-up, using the example of hemoglobinopathy traits. At a workshop of the 2023 Association of Public Health Laboratories NBS Symposium, participants filled out a survey and modeled their state workflows. Salient features were extracted and synthesized by state. A subset of models was member checked. Representatives from 19 U.S. states participated in the workflow analysis. Mail was overwhelmingly relied upon to convey the results. NBS programs differed by point of first contact with parents and degree of reliance on third parties. A participatory approach is useful for the rapid preliminary documentation of existing NBS program diversity and opportunities and challenges to improve patient education and follow-up. Future work should broaden the analysis to additional entities or individuals, particularly parents and caregivers. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 6343 KiB  
Article
Newborn Screening for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency: Lessons Learned from Screening and Follow-Up of the Preterm Newborn Population
by Amy Gaviglio, Michael Lasarev, Ruthanne Sheller, Sikha Singh and Mei Baker
Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2023, 9(4), 68; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns9040068 - 15 Dec 2023
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 3398
Abstract
Newborn screening (NBS) for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (SCID) by measurement of T-cell receptor excision circles (TRECs) successfully identifies newborns with SCID and severe T-cell lymphopenia, as intended. At the same time, NBS programs face the challenge of false positive results, with a disproportionately [...] Read more.
Newborn screening (NBS) for Severe Combined Immunodeficiency (SCID) by measurement of T-cell receptor excision circles (TRECs) successfully identifies newborns with SCID and severe T-cell lymphopenia, as intended. At the same time, NBS programs face the challenge of false positive results, with a disproportionately high number in the premature newborn population. This study evaluates TREC values and SCID screening outcomes in premature newborns and elucidates evidence-based SCID screening practices that reduce unnecessary follow-up activities in this population. De-identified individual SCID newborn screening data and aggregate SCID screening data were obtained from seven states across the US for babies born between 2018 and 2020. Relevant statistics were performed on data pooled from these states to quantify screening performance metrics and clinical impact on various birth and gestational age categories of newborns. The data were normalized using multiples-of-the-median (MoM) values to allow for the aggregation of data across states. The aggregation of NBS data across a range of NBS programs highlighted the trajectory of TREC values over time, both between and within newborns, and provides evidence for improved SCID screening recommendations in the premature and low birth weight population. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

9 pages, 213 KiB  
Article
Infants with Congenital Diseases Identified through Newborn Screening—United States, 2018–2020
by Amy Gaviglio, Sarah McKasson, Sikha Singh and Jelili Ojodu
Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2023, 9(2), 23; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns9020023 - 13 Apr 2023
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 4001
Abstract
Newborn screening (NBS) is a state or territory-based public health system that screens newborns for congenital diseases that typically do not present with clinical symptoms at birth but can cause significant mortality and morbidity if not detected or treated quickly. NBS continues to [...] Read more.
Newborn screening (NBS) is a state or territory-based public health system that screens newborns for congenital diseases that typically do not present with clinical symptoms at birth but can cause significant mortality and morbidity if not detected or treated quickly. NBS continues to be one of the most successful public health interventions in the US, providing early detection and intervention to all infants. The increase in overall birth prevalence of core Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP) diseases detected via dried blood spot (DBS) specimens from 2015–2017 (17.50–18.31 per 10,000) to 2018–2020 (20.07 per 10,000), as reported into the APHL NewSTEPs database, affirms the importance and impact of NBS programs. This report presents aggregate numbers and birth prevalence of diseases detected by DBS on the RUSP from 2018–2020, including data from fifty US states and two territories. Full article
14 pages, 291 KiB  
Article
Newborn Screening for Cystic Fibrosis: A Qualitative Study of Successes and Challenges from Universal Screening in the United States
by Marci K. Sontag, Joshua I. Miller, Sarah McKasson, Amy Gaviglio, Stacey L. Martiniano, Rhonda West, Marisol Vazquez, Clement L. Ren, Philip M. Farrell, Susanna A. McColley and Yvonne Kellar-Guenther
Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2022, 8(3), 38; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns8030038 - 23 Jun 2022
Cited by 16 | Viewed by 5153
Abstract
Cystic fibrosis (CF) newborn screening (NBS) was universally adopted in 2009 in the United States. Variations in NBS practices between states may impact the timing of diagnosis and intervention. Quantitative metrics can provide insight into NBS programs (NBSP), but the nuances cannot be [...] Read more.
Cystic fibrosis (CF) newborn screening (NBS) was universally adopted in 2009 in the United States. Variations in NBS practices between states may impact the timing of diagnosis and intervention. Quantitative metrics can provide insight into NBS programs (NBSP), but the nuances cannot be elucidated without additional feedback from programs. This study was designed to determine facilitators and barriers to timely diagnosis and intervention following NBS for CF. The median age at the first CF event for infants with CF within each state was used to define early and late states (n = 15 per group); multiple CF centers were invited in states with more than two CF centers. Thirty states were eligible, and 61 NBSP and CF centers were invited to participate in structured interviews to determine facilitators and barriers. Once saturation of themes was reached, no other interviews were conducted. Forty-five interviews were conducted (n = 16 early CF center, n = 12 late CF center, n = 11 early NBSP, and n = 6 late NBSP). Most interviewees reported good communication between CF centers and NBSP. Communication between primary care providers (PCPs) and families was identified as a challenge, leading to delays in referral and subsequent diagnosis. The misperception of low clinical risk in infants from racial and ethnic minority groups was a barrier to early diagnostic evaluation for all groups. NBSP and CF centers have strong relationships. Early diagnosis may be facilitated through more engagement with PCPs. Quality improvement initiatives should focus on continuing strong partnerships between CF centers and NBS programs, improving education, communication strategies, and partnerships with PCPs, and improving CF NBS timeliness and accuracy. Full article
14 pages, 232 KiB  
Article
COVID-19 Pandemic-Related Impacts on Newborn Screening Public Health Surveillance
by Sikha Singh, Michele Caggana, Carol Johnson, Rachel Lee, Guisou Zarbalian, Amy Gaviglio, Alisha Keehn, Mia Morrison, Scott J. Becker and Jelili Ojodu
Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2022, 8(2), 28; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns8020028 - 15 Apr 2022
Cited by 7 | Viewed by 4593
Abstract
Newborn screening (NBS) is an essential public health service that performs screening to identify those newborns at increased risk for a panel of disorders, most of which are genetic. The goal of screening is to link those newborns at the highest risk to [...] Read more.
Newborn screening (NBS) is an essential public health service that performs screening to identify those newborns at increased risk for a panel of disorders, most of which are genetic. The goal of screening is to link those newborns at the highest risk to timely intervention and potentially life-saving treatment. The global COVID-19 pandemic led to disruptions within the United States public health system, revealing implications for the continuity of newborn screening laboratories and follow-up operations. The impacts of COVID-19 across different states at various time points meant that NBS programs impacted by the pandemic later could benefit from the immediate experiences of the earlier impacted programs. This article will review the collection, analysis, and dissemination of information during the COVID-19 pandemic facilitated by a national, centralized technical assistance and resource center for NBS programs. Full article
9 pages, 238 KiB  
Article
Genomics and Newborn Screening: Perspectives of Public Health Programs
by Aaron J. Goldenberg, Roselle Ponsaran, Amy Gaviglio, Dalton Simancek and Beth A. Tarini
Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2022, 8(1), 11; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns8010011 - 28 Jan 2022
Cited by 14 | Viewed by 4905
Abstract
This study assesses the benefits and challenges of using genomics in Newborn Screening Programs (NBS) from the perspectives of State program officials. This project aims to help programs develop policies that will aid in the integration of genomic technology. Discussion groups were conducted [...] Read more.
This study assesses the benefits and challenges of using genomics in Newborn Screening Programs (NBS) from the perspectives of State program officials. This project aims to help programs develop policies that will aid in the integration of genomic technology. Discussion groups were conducted with the NBS Program and Laboratory Directors in the seven HRSA Regional Genomics Collaboratives (August 2014–March 2016). The discussion groups addressed expected uses of genomics, potential benefits, and challenges of integrating genomic technology, and educational needs for parents and other NBS stakeholders: Twelve focus groups were conducted, which included participants from over 40 state programs. Benefits of incorporating genomics included improving screening modalities, supporting diagnostic procedures, and screening for a wider spectrum of disorders. Challenges included the costs of genomics, the ability to educate parents and health care providers about results, and the potential negative psychosocial impact of genomic information. Attempts to address the challenges of integrating genomics must focus on preserving the child welfare goals of NBS programs. Health departments will need to explore how genomics could be used to enhance programs while maintaining universal access to screening. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Ethical and Psychosocial Aspects of Genomics in the Neonatal Period)
8 pages, 396 KiB  
Article
Common Challenges and Identified Solutions for State Newborn Screening Programs during COVID-19 Pandemic
by Dylan Simon, Elizabeth Broadbridge, Mei Baker, Amy Gaviglio, Dorota Gruber, Kimberly Noble Piper, Norma P. Tavakoli, Jamie Sullivan and Annie Kennedy
Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2022, 8(1), 7; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns8010007 - 18 Jan 2022
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 5111
Abstract
During the COVID-19 pandemic, state newborn screening programs faced challenges to ensure this essential public health program continued to function at a high level. In December 2020, the EveryLife Foundation for Rare Diseases held a workshop to discuss these common challenges and solutions. [...] Read more.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, state newborn screening programs faced challenges to ensure this essential public health program continued to function at a high level. In December 2020, the EveryLife Foundation for Rare Diseases held a workshop to discuss these common challenges and solutions. Newborn screening officials described challenges including short staffing across the entire program, collection and transport of specimens, interrupted follow-up activities, and pilot study recruitment. To address these challenges, state programs implemented a wide variety of solutions to maintain the high standards of newborn screening. To address staffing issues, newborn screening programs, public health laboratories, and hospitals all cross-trained personnel, worked to manage staff stress, and established essential functions. Other solutions included working with courier companies to ensure the timely pick-up of specimen, creating educational materials for hospital staff, and the creation of hybrid recruitment models for pilot studies. Implementing the lessons discussed throughout this paper can help to prepare for the next public health emergencies to ensure that a program that interacts with millions of families every year and saves the lives of thousands of children every year is minimally impacted. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 1196 KiB  
Review
A Newborn Screening Education Best Practices Framework: Development and Adoption
by Adrianna Evans, Keri LeBlanc, Natasha Bonhomme, Scott M. Shone, Amy Gaviglio, Debra Freedenberg, Jeremy Penn, Carol Johnson, Beth Vogel, Siobhan M. Dolan and Aaron J. Goldenberg
Int. J. Neonatal Screen. 2019, 5(2), 22; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijns5020022 - 1 Jun 2019
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 6217
Abstract
Newborn screening is a process-based public health service. Newborn screening staff and families alike are essential to maintaining the timeliness of the screening process. Newborn screening education must be accurate and accessible. Past newborn screening conferences have highlighted gaps in best practice and [...] Read more.
Newborn screening is a process-based public health service. Newborn screening staff and families alike are essential to maintaining the timeliness of the screening process. Newborn screening education must be accurate and accessible. Past newborn screening conferences have highlighted gaps in best practice and evidence-based guidance on newborn screening education. Sharing successful strategies across programs mitigates the scarcity of resources by cutting costs and reducing the burden of work. These factors illustrate the need for an education framework to guide newborn screening education efforts. The Newborn Screening Education Best Practices Framework responds to these issues by outlining guidance for newborn screening education approaches. Experts in the fields of newborn screening, genetics, and bioethics as well as previous research on best practice guidelines have contributed to the development of this framework. The framework outlines a process for users to evaluate newborn screening education approaches as best practices. This framework reviews best practices using a two-step approach, looking at guiding questions, implementation of the newborn screening issue, and evaluation. The framework helps the user define the characteristics of the newborn screening issue, intended audience, and practical steps to implementation, and then decide whether or not it can be used as a best practice. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop