Primary Care Physicians' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Experience with Personal Genetic Testing

Self-Reported Access to Specialized Genetics Providers Among Families of Young Children With Birth Defects in Texas

Specialized genetics providers can help families of children with birth defects understand their child's condition and guide their medical treatment. The Birth Defects Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch (BDESB) routinely connects young children from the Texas Birth Defects Registry (TBDR) with select birth defects to agency social workers for assistance. Beginning in November 2022, social workers asked parents they reached: "Has the parent or child met with a geneticist or genetic counselor (or visited a genetics clinic)?". Responses were tabulated, overall and by select characteristics of interest. A chi-square test was used to evaluate if these characteristics were associated (p < 0.05) with self-reported access to a specialized genetics provider. Among the 400 families reached, 261 (65%) did not recall accessing specialized genetics providers. Lower access was observed among children with spina bifida or encephalocele, isolated birth defects, children without medical insurance, children meeting CDC developmental milestones, and younger mothers. Lower access was also observed in certain areas of the state, including the Texas-Mexico border. Our findings suggest that, in Texas, more than half (65%) of families of children with select birth defects are not accessing specialized genetics providers, and additional research is needed to work toward increasing access.

The Role of Human Voice in Direct-To-Consumer Health Communication

Despite overall positive perceptions, many customers distrust direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies in regard to privacy and aftercare. Prior research suggests companies can assuage mistrust by personalizing communication when discussing sensitive health information. This content analysis of customer e-mails (N = 338) investigates the purpose, personalization, and use of the human voice strategy by direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies to gain trust. Results reveal that companies rarely use human voice when communicating with customers, most of the information provided is promotional, and they invite dialogue less over time. Theoretical and practical implications are provided.

Qualitative assessment of primary care providers' attitudes toward genetic services and genetics education

As the role of primary care providers (PCPs) in genetic medicine increases, there is a need for training related to the integration of genetics into primary care. However, little is known about PCPs' attitudes towards and perceived needs for such training. We conducted semi-structured interviews with nine PCPs to capture information about their perceptions of their role in genetics and their continuing medical educational needs related to genetics in primary care, and we conducted thematic analysis. The identified themes fell into the following topics: perceptions of genetics, PCPs' roles in genetics, common reasons for referrals to genetic services, barriers to referrals to genetic services, genetic tests ordered by PCPs, and PCPs' educational needs regarding genetics. The most common perception of genetics was for the indication of personal or family history of cancer. PCPs' self-described role in genetics fell into two categories: recognition for when a referral for genetic services is warranted and education of families. Participants were divided in their opinion as to whether they should order genetic tests. PCP's education needs fell into four main categories: how and when to refer to genetic services, test interpretation, basic genetics, and co-management of genetic conditions, with a particular emphasis on cancer. While PCPs expressed an interest in further genetics education, they also questioned the applicability of genetics to their practice. The information obtained in this study can help inform the development of successful education activities and programs in genetics for PCPs.

A Comprehensive Approach to Clinical Decision Support in the Return of Genome Informed Risk Assessments to Primary Care Pediatricians

BACKGROUND

 Primary care pediatricians play an important role in genetic testing, including referrals, test ordering, responding to results, assessing risk, treatment, and managing care. As genetic testing rapidly evolves to include new tests identifying patients at risk for certain conditions, alert-based clinical decision support is insufficient in assisting pediatric primary care providers in working with patients, parents, genetics, and other specialties. Supporting pediatricians in the return of these results requires addressing gaps in genetics training and integrating genetics into practice with education, information resources, and specialized tools.

OBJECTIVES

 This study aimed to capture requirements for developing systems and processes to support primary care pediatricians in the return of genome-informed risk assessments.

METHODS

 We performed a requirements analysis to inform the design of clinical decision support tools and processes for pediatric providers of patients who received a genome informed risk assessment, a novel test that combines polygenic risk scores with patient and family histories to deliver a risk assessment for common medical conditions. We developed an interview guide consisting of scenario presentations, questionnaires, and semi-structured questions to elicit provider responses on a broad set of requirements to manage results with patients and caregivers.

RESULTS

 Twenty providers from 10 primary care pediatric practices within a single health system participated in the study. The findings demonstrated that providers feel responsible to be involved in the process of returning results but require a support system that integrates education, provider and patient information resources, effective communication with genetics, and electronic health record decision support tools that can accommodate a range of clinical scenarios and provider workflow preferences.

CONCLUSION

 Supporting providers with the return of genetic testing results such as the genome informed risk assessment requires a comprehensive approach to decision support consisting of education, communication, and a comprehensive and integrated set of electronic health record tools.

Knowledge, attitudes and demand toward cardiovascular polygenic risk testing in clinical practice: cross-sectional survey of patients

The goal of this study was to assess patients' prior exposure and current level of knowledge of polygenic risk scores (PRSs). We also explored reactions to receiving a high-risk or low-risk score, and gauged the overall attitudes and demand patients have with regards to PRSs. We developed an online investigator-designed survey based on existing validated tools in genetic testing. There were two versions of the survey, one including a hypothetical high-risk PRS and one with a low-risk PRS. This survey was distributed to patients attending a cardiovascular clinic for primary or secondary prevention. A total of 226 participants responded to the survey. 177 patients (79%) had not read nor heard about polygenic testing. 209 patients (93%) had never discussed polygenic testing with their health care professional (HCP). 208 patients (93%) had never received polygenic testing. The average score on the knowledge quiz was 2.47/10 [95% C.I. (2.17, 2.78)]. Participants that received a high-risk survey scored 20.52/35 [95% C.I. (16.14, 24.9)] with regards to negative emotions while low-risk survey participants scored 17.96/35 [95% C.I. (13.98, 21.94)] (p < 0.001). Participants that received a high-risk survey scored 12.42/15 [95% C.I. (10.43, 14.41)] for demand and low-risk survey participants scored 12.22/15 [95% C.I. (9.66, 14.78)] (p = 0.549). Patients have limited prior exposure and knowledge of PRSs. Compared to receiving a low-risk score, participants receiving a high-risk score have more negative emotions and feelings of uncertainty. Despite the lack of knowledge, and the high rate of negative emotions and uncertainty, demand for PRSs in cardiology practice is high.

Information needs and sources of health professionals in Malawi

BACKGROUND

Health professionals require up-to-date information in their pursuit of evidence-based practice in health care. There is a plethora of literature on information behaviour of different user groups across disciplines in Malawi with little evidence on health professionals.

OBJECTIVES

The study investigated the information behaviour of health professionals at one of the three biggest hospitals in Malawi.

METHODS

A descriptive survey design was used. Ninety-four health professionals participated in the study. SPSS was used for descriptive analysis to generate frequencies and percentages.

RESULTS

Personal and professional development constituted the major information need among all the health professionals. Health professionals used books and colleagues as sources of information, but many preferred to use websites, rather than print resources. The challenges that affected their information behaviour included, inadequate information resources, limited access to the internet and e-databases, and lack of information literacy skills.

DISCUSSION

The study revealed various information needs of health professionals and their preferred information sources. Health professionals need adequate library and information services with both print and digital resources and support from information professionals. Nevertheless, use of the hospital library was very low among health professionals.

CONCLUSION

Health professionals at MCH continue to face various challenges that hinder access and efficient use of information resources.

Healthcare professionals' knowledge and attitudes towards polygenic risk testing for glaucoma

BACKGROUND

Effective clinical implementation of polygenic risk testing for glaucoma relies on healthcare professionals' attitudes and knowledge of the test. Given the emerging applications of the test, it will likely impact a range of healthcare professionals and will require competency in polygenic risk scores concepts for all those involved in patient care. To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess healthcare professionals' views towards polygenic testing for glaucoma.

METHODS

An online cross-sectional questionnaire was distributed to healthcare professionals via relevant professional organisations in Australia. The questionnaire assessed experience and confidence with genetic testing, glaucoma and genetic knowledge, recommendations for the tests, and factors affecting the decision.

RESULTS

A total of 94 participants completed the questionnaire. The sample was composed of ophthalmologists (36%), optometrists (21%), orthoptists (17%), general practitioners (16%) and clinical geneticists/genetic counsellors (10%). Although familiarity with polygenic risk scores for glaucoma was low overall (11%), the majority reported a positive attitude towards recommending testing based on known risk factors such as family history (91%) and older age (57%). Over 95% indicated that ophthalmologists would be the most appropriate group to order polygenic risk testing and communicate results. The majority felt they would benefit from more training on polygenic risk scores (93%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicated that multiple groups of healthcare professionals were neither familiar nor confident with the concept of glaucoma polygenic risk testing, and identified training and education needs to support the implementation of testing into clinical practice.

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of primary healthcare practitioners in low- and middle-income countries: a scoping review on genetics

Individualised treatment, including genetic services, calls for an increased role of primary healthcare practitioners (pHCPs) in diagnosing and caring for individuals with genetic conditions. PHCPs' genetics knowledge and practices must be current to ensure adequate care. A scoping review was conducted to explore peer-reviewed articles on the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAPs) of pHCPs concerning genetics, genetic testing, and genetic services. English-language human genetics/genomics articles published between January 1990 and April 2022 in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were included. Twenty-eight articles from 16 LMICs in five World Health Organisation (WHO)-defined regions met the inclusion criteria and showed a steady increase in publications, with varied contributions by region. The Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR) contributed the most articles (n = 8), while the Western Pacific Region (WPR) had the least (n = 2). Brazil published the most articles (n = 6), while ten countries contributed one article each. Fifteen articles included knowledge, 19 included attitudes towards genetics, and eight included genetic practices. The findings indicate that pHCPs in LMICs lack knowledge of genetics and its applications despite their positive outlook towards genetic services. Barriers such as limited resources, financial constraints, and cultural or religious beliefs hinder access to genetic services. Enhancing pHCPs' genetics education is vital for improving care for those affected by genetic conditions. The scarcity of literature in LMICs emphasises the need for research on educational interventions to improve patient outcomes and family support.

Sociodemographic and Clinical Characteristics Associated with Genetic Testing among Cancer Survivors: Evidence from Three Cancer Registries

INTRODUCTION

Genetic tests, including germline and tumor (somatic) testing, can optimize the clinical care and outcomes for cancer patients and their family members. However, evidence on cancer patients' use of genetic testing and discussions about it with healthcare providers is limited.

METHODS

Study participants included cancer survivors aged 18 or older, drawn from the 2021 Health Information and National Trends Survey (HINTS)-Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) linked database, which comprises three US cancer registries: Iowa, New Mexico, and the Greater Bay Area. Sociodemographic factors (e.g., age, sex, income, education) at the time of the survey and clinical characteristics (e.g., cancer site, stage) at the time of diagnosis were compared based on self-reported genetic testing status and provider discussions, using survey design-adjusted analysis.

RESULTS

The weighted study sample comprised 415,978 cancer survivors with a mean age of 70.5 years at the time of the survey. Overall, 17.0% reported having germline testing, 8.5% having tumor testing, and 8.6% discussing tumor testing with their healthcare providers. Higher proportions of germline genetic testing were observed among survivors under age 65 at the time of the survey, females, holding college degrees, and with private insurance coverage compared to their respective counterparts - males, aged 65 or above when surveyed, with lower educational attainment, and with public insurance or uninsured. The proportion of those who reported tumor testing was greater for those diagnosed in recent years (2015-2017 vs. before 2002). Regarding clinical characteristics, survivors with ovarian and breast cancers had a 7.0-36.4% higher prevalence of both testing compared to those with other cancer types lacking germline indication. More cancer survivors diagnosed at distant stages (vs. regional) or between 2015 and 2017 (vs. 2003-2010) reported having provider discussions about tumor testing.

CONCLUSION

Findings showed that the highest reports of germline testing were among young female cancer survivors and those with higher education and private insurance. Survivors diagnosed in recent years or with advanced-stage disease were more likely to report discussing tumor testing with providers. Further research is warranted to better understand the barriers and educational needs of cancer patients, caregivers, and providers to optimize genetic testing strategies.

Genetic knowledge and attitudes towards genetic testing among final-year medical students at a public university in Ecuador

Background

Genetics plays a crucial role in the field of medicine, offering numerous applications. However, health professionals often have insufficient knowledge in this area. Therefore, it is essential to provide appropriate genetics education during university studies.

Aim

This study aimed to assess the knowledge and attitudes towards genetic testing among final-year medical students at a public university in Ecuador.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted involving final-year medical students from a public university in Ecuador. The third version of the Genetic Literacy and Attitudes Survey was administered between April and May 2022. The study examined sociodemographic characteristics, genetic knowledge, and attitudes towards genetic testing.

Results

The study included 153 medical students, of which 58.2% identified as female. Most participants fell within the age range of 22 to 25 years old (85.0%). Regarding genetic knowledge, three-quarters of the participants (75.2%) demonstrated intermediate proficiency, while only 9.80% possessed a high level of knowledge. Attitudes towards the clinical and therapeutic applications of genetics, scientific advancements, access to conventional medicine, and other related topics were found to be appropriate.

Conclusion

The findings suggest that most final-year medical students at a public university in Ecuador have intermediate genetic knowledge and hold appropriate attitudes towards genetic testing. However, higher education institutions should conduct a comprehensive analysis and restructure their curricula to better prepare students for the medical and technological challenges of the 21st century.

Implementing genetic testing in diabetes: Knowledge, perceptions of healthcare professionals, and barriers in a developing country

INTRODUCTION

Maturity-Onset Diabetes of the Young (MODY) is an unusual type of diabetes often missed in clinical practice, especially in Africa. Treatment decisions for MODY depend on a precise diagnosis, only made by genetic testing. We aimed to determine MODY knowledge among Nigerian healthcare professionals (HCPs), their perceptions, and barriers to the implementation of genetic testing in diabetes patients.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among doctors and nurses in three levels of public and private healthcare institutions in Ibadan, Nigeria, from December 2018 to June 2019. In all, 70% and 30% of a total 415 participants were recruited from public and private centers, respectively. HCPs were recruited in a 60:40% ratio, respectively. A 51-item instrument was used to assess MODY knowledge, perceptions of HCPs, and barriers to the implementation of genetic testing in diabetes patients.

RESULTS

In the survey, 43.4% self-rated their current MODY knowledge to be at least moderate. About 68%, 73% and 86%, respectively, correctly answered 3 of 5 questions on basic genetics' knowledge. However, only 1 of 7 MODY-specific questions was answered correctly by 72.7% of the respondents. The mean basic genetics and MODY-specific knowledge scores were 2.6/5 (SD=1.0) and 1.8/9 (SD=1.3), respectively. Multiple linear regression showed higher mean scores among those aged 30-49 years, those with degrees and fellowships (except PhD), and general practitioners; 360 (80.0%) perceived that genetic testing plays a central role in diabetes care. Barriers to genetic testing were lack of access to testing facilities, guidance on the use of and updates/educational materials on genetic testing (82.7%, 62.1% and 50.3%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The level of MODY awareness and knowledge among Nigerian HCPs is unacceptably low with a lack of access to genetic testing facilities. These can hinder the implementation of precision diabetes medicine. Increased awareness, provision of decision support aids, and genetic testing facilities are urgently needed.

Challenges to genetic testing for germline mutations associated with breast cancer among African Americans

Inequities in preventive cancer screening, diagnosis, treatment, and inferior cancer outcomes continue to pose challenges across the cancer continuum. While the exact reasons for these inferior outcomes are unknown, multiple barriers to various domains of social determinants of health (SDOH) play a vital role, leading to inequities in cancer care. These include barriers to transportation, housing, and food insecurities, contributing to delays in preventive screening and treatment. Furthermore, aggressive biologies also exist across various racial profiles with accompanying germline mutations. For example, African Americans (AAs) have a higher incidence of triple-negative breast cancer subtype and a high prevalence of BRCA1/2 gene mutations, increasing the risk of multiple cancers, warranting high-risk screening for these populations. Unfortunately, other barriers, such as financial insecurities, low health literacy rates, and lack of awareness, lead to delays in cancer screening and genetic testing, even with available high-risk screening and risk reduction procedures. In addition, physicians receive minimal interdisciplinary training to address genetic assessment, interpretation of the results, and almost no additional training in addressing the unique needs of racial minorities, leading to suboptimal delivery of genetic assessment provision resources among AAs. In this review, we discuss the confluence of factors and barriers limiting genetic testing among AAs and highlight the prevalence of germline mutations associated with increased risk of breast cancer among AAs, reflecting the need for multi-panel germline testing as well as education regarding hereditary cancer risks in underserved minorities.

Clinical Strategies in Gene Screening Counseling for the Healthy General Population

The burgeoning interest in precision medicine has propelled an increase in the use of genome tests for screening purposes within the healthy population. Gene screening tests aim to pre-emptively identify those individuals who may be genetically predisposed to certain diseases. However, as genetic screening becomes more commonplace, it is essential to acknowledge the unique challenges it poses. A prevalent issue in this regard is the occurrence of falsepositive results, which can lead to unnecessary additional tests or treatments, and psychological distress. Additionally, the interpretation of genomic variants is based on current research evidence, and can accordingly change as new research findings emerge, potentially altering the clinical significance of these variants. Conversely, a further prominent concern regards false assurances in genetic testing, as genetic tests can yield false-negative results, potentially posing a significant clinical risk. Moreover, the results obtained for the same disease can vary among different genetic testing services, due to differences in the types of variants assessed, the scope of tests, analytical methods, and the algorithms used for predicting diseases. Consequently, whereas genetic testing holds significant promise for the future of medicine, it poses unique challenges. If conducted without a full understanding of its implications, genetic testing may fail to achieve its purpose potentially hindering effective health management. Therefore, to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the implications of genetic testing within the general population, sufficient discussion and careful consideration should be given to counseling based on gene test results.

Implementation of rapid genomic sequencing in safety-net neonatal intensive care units: protocol for the VIrtual GenOme CenteR (VIGOR) proof-of-concept study

INTRODUCTION

Rapid genomic sequencing (rGS) in critically ill infants with suspected genetic disorders has high diagnostic and clinical utility. However, rGS has primarily been available at large referral centres with the resources and expertise to offer state-of-the-art genomic care. Critically ill infants from racial and ethnic minority and/or low-income populations disproportionately receive care in safety-net and/or community settings lacking access to state-of-the-art genomic care, contributing to unacceptable health equity gaps. VIrtual GenOme CenteR is a 'proof-of-concept' implementation science study of an innovative delivery model for genomic care in safety-net neonatal intensive care units (NICUs).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We developed a virtual genome centre at a referral centre to remotely support safety-net NICU sites predominantly serving racial and ethnic minority and/or low-income populations and have limited to no access to rGS. Neonatal providers at each site receive basic education about genomic medicine from the study team and identify eligible infants. The study team enrols eligible infants (goal n of 250) and their parents and follows families for 12 months. Enrolled infants receive rGS, the study team creates clinical interpretive reports to guide neonatal providers on interpreting results, and neonatal providers return results to families. Data is collected via (1) medical record abstraction, (2) surveys, interviews and focus groups with neonatal providers and (3) surveys and interviews with families. We aim to examine comprehensive implementation outcomes based on the Proctor Implementation Framework using a mixed methods approach.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is approved by the institutional review board of Boston Children's Hospital (IRB-P00040496) and participating sites. Participating families are required to provide electronic written informed consent and neonatal provider consent is implied through the completion of surveys. The results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and data will be made accessible per National Institutes of Health (NIH) policies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05205356/clinicaltrials.gov.

iKNOWgynetics - A web-based learning concept to empower primary care gynecologists to participate in the care of patients with a family history of breast and ovarian cancer

Familial cancer burden and genetics play an increasingly important role in the early detection and prevention of gynecological cancers. However, people with hereditary cancer risks are often identified late when they already have cancer. We aimed at developing and evaluating a training concept for primary care gynecologists-iKNOWgynetics-to improve their knowledge and awareness of genetic cancer syndromes and their ability to identify patients with increased familial cancer risks based on up-to-date evidence and current guidelines (in Germany, primary care includes all doctors treating patients on an outpatient basis without a clear separation of the expertise of the doctor or of their specialty). Starting off with a needs assessment among primary care gynecologists, we developed and evaluated an online training concept-using a web-based learning platform in combination with a live virtual seminar-to convey practice-relevant knowledge about familial cancer. After registration, participants get access to the web-based learning platform (www.iknowgynetics.de) to prepare for the virtual seminars and to use it as online reference to re-access the contents after the training. Evaluation included multiple-choice (MC) questions on knowledge and participants' self-efficacy to implement the acquired knowledge, which were administered in a pre-post design. Of 109 participants, 103 (94.5%) filled out pre- and post-questionnaires. Eighty-five participants were gynecologists in primary care from Berlin (81.2%) and Brandenburg (18.8%) and had an average of 24.1 years (SD = 8.5 years) of professional experience. After the training, participants answered significantly more knowledge questions correctly (M = 15.2 of 17, SD = 1.3) than before (M = 13.8 of 17, SD = 1.7) (p < 0.01) and felt more confident to be able to apply referral criteria for specialized counseling in practice (p < 0.001). The online-based training iKNOWgynetics considers the busy schedule of primary care gynecologists and supports them in acquiring practice-relevant information on familial cancer risks and on how to identify healthy persons at risk, which may ultimately help to improve the prevention of gynecological cancers. In future studies, the reported concept could be transferred to other entities.

Poor recall of genetics curriculum by medical students highlights barriers to use in clinical practice

Many current and upcoming healthcare providers do not feel comfortable ordering or discussing genetic tests and using genetic information in medicine. Nationally, a little over a quarter of medical students indicate that they do not feel prepared to use genetic information in clinical rotations, despite attempts at many schools to remodel the genetics curriculum. This study was conducted at Emory University School of Medicine to identify gaps within the medical curriculum that may contribute to student reports that they feel underprepared to apply genetic knowledge in clinical practice. The analysis included a comprehensive curriculum inventory of genetic content that was then compared to the responses from focus groups of randomly selected second- and fourth-year medical students without a prior genetics degree or background. This joint analysis of precisely what was taught and how it was perceived by students was informative in the development of targeted interventions in our curriculum, and it highlighted the important role of genetic counselors in the education of medical students. Our curriculum has a structure similar to that at many other schools, in which core genetics concepts are concentrated in a brief segment in the first year. We believe our results will be useful for other medical schools to address the perception by medical students that they are underprepared to use genetic information and other basic sciences clinically.

Genomic medicine in neonatal care: progress and challenges

During the neonatal period, many genetic disorders present and contribute to neonatal morbidity and mortality. Genomic medicine-the use of genomic information in clinical care- has the potential to significantly reduce morbidity and mortality in the neonatal period and improve outcomes for this population. Diagnostic genomic testing for symptomatic newborns, especially rapid testing, has been shown to be feasible and have diagnostic and clinical utility, particularly in the short-term. Ongoing studies are assessing the feasibility and utility, including personal utility, of implementation in diverse populations. Genomic screening for asymptomatic newborns has also been studied, and the acceptability and feasibility of such an approach remains an active area of investigation. Emerging precision therapies, with examples even at the "n-of-1" level, highlight the promise of precision diagnostics to lead to early intervention and improve outcomes. To sustainably implement genomic medicine in neonatal care in an ethical, effective, and equitable manner, we need to ensure access to genetics and genomics knowledge, access to genomic tests, which is currently limited by payors, feasible processes for ordering these tests, and access to follow up in the clinical and research realms. Future studies will provide further insight into enablers and barriers to optimize implementation strategies.

Perceived benefits and barriers to implementing precision preventive care: Results of a national physician survey

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) may improve risk-stratification in preventive care. Their clinical implementation will depend on primary care physicians' (PCPs) uptake. We surveyed PCPs in a national physician database about the perceived clinical utility, benefits, and barriers to the use of PRS in preventive care. Among 367 respondents (participation rate 96.3%), mean (SD) age was 54.9 (12.9) years, 137 (37.3%) were female, and mean (SD) time since medical school graduation was 27.2 (13.3) years. Respondents reported greater perceived utility for more clinical action (e.g., earlier or more intensive screening, preventive medications, or lifestyle modification) for patients with high-risk PRS than for delayed or discontinued prevention actions for low-risk patients (p < 0.001). Respondents most often chose out-of-pocket costs (48%), lack of clinical guidelines (24%), and insurance discrimination concerns (22%) as extreme barriers. Latent class analysis identified 3 subclasses of respondents. Skeptics (n = 83, 22.6%) endorsed less agreement with individual clinical utilities, saw patient anxiety and insurance discrimination as significant barriers, and agreed less often that PRS could help patients make better health decisions. Learners (n = 134, 36.5%) and enthusiasts (n = 150, 40.9%) expressed similar levels of agreement that PRS had utility for preventive actions and that PRS could be useful for patient decision-making. Compared with enthusiasts, however, learners perceived greater barriers to the clinical use of PRS. Overall results suggest that PCPs generally endorse using PRS to guide medical decision-making about preventive care, and barriers identified suggest interventions to address their needs and concerns.

The role of polygenic risk scores in breast cancer risk perception and decision-making

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have the potential to improve the accuracy of clinical risk assessments, yet questions about their clinical validity and readiness for clinical implementation persist. Understanding how individuals integrate and act on the information provided by PRS is critical for their effective integration into routine clinical care, yet few studies have examined how individuals respond to the receipt of polygenic risk information. We conducted an embedded Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI) study to examine if and how unaffected participants in a US population breast cancer screening trial understood and utilized PRS, as part of a multifactorial risk score combining traditional risk factors with a genetic risk assessment, to make screening and risk-reduction decisions. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 24 trial participants who were designated at elevated risk for breast cancer due to their combined risk score. Interviews were analyzed using a grounded theory approach. Participants understood PRS conceptually and accepted it as one of many risk factors to consider, yet the value and meaning they ascribed to this risk estimate varied. Most participants reported financial and insurance barriers to enhanced screening with MRI and were not interested in taking risk-reducing medications. These findings contribute to our understanding of how PRS may be best translated from research to clinical care. Furthermore, they illuminate ethical concerns about identifying risk and making recommendations based on polygenic risk in a population screening context where many may have trouble accessing appropriate care.

Referral networks for pediatric patients with genetic conditions: The perspective of occupational therapists

Families of children with developmental delays but no diagnosed genetic condition may benefit from connection to genetic systems of care. This work examines the role of occupational therapy as a space for families of pediatric patients to gain access to genetic services. Between September 2021 and February 2022, we interviewed 20 occupational therapists in New England who work primarily with pediatric patients. We transcribed the interviews and used a grounded theory approach to identify and code recurring themes. The data reveal several barriers to linking pediatric patients to genetic systems of care, including lack of insurance coverage, wait times for appointments and test results, hesitant primary care providers, and familial and cultural stigma of disability. We discuss the unique role of occupational therapists as professionals who spend substantial time with patients, often in their everyday environments, to bridge these barriers. We also address challenges associated with occupational therapists facilitating connections to genetics services, including their lack of specialized knowledge of genetics and barriers fully integrating with others on the medical team.

Role of genomic medicine and implementing equitable access for critically ill infants in neonatal intensive care units

Genetic disorders are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in infants admitted to neonatal intensive care units. This population has immense potential to benefit from genomic medicine, as early precision diagnosis is critical to early personalized management. However, the implementation of genomic medicine in neonatology thus far has arguably worsened health inequities, and strategies are urgently needed to achieve equitable access to genomics in neonatal care. In this perspective, we demonstrate the utility of genomic sequencing in critically ill infants and highlight three key recommendations to advance equitable access: recruitment of underrepresented populations, education of non-genetics providers to empower practice of genomic medicine, and development of innovative infrastructure to implement genomic medicine across diverse settings.

Residential Locale Is Associated with Disparities in Genetic Testing-Related Outcomes Among BRCA1/2-Positive Women

BACKGROUND

While research on hereditary genetic testing for BRCA1/2 mutations continues to emerge, there remain unanswered questions regarding access to testing and cancer-related care. Our study determined the associations between race/ethnicity, residential locale, and genetic testing provider and related outcomes among US women with BRCA1/2 genetic mutations.

METHODS

One hundred ninety-three BRCA1/2-positive women from vulnerable health backgrounds were recruited via private national Facebook BRCA1/2-oriented support groups and completed an online survey. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable logistic regression for the associations between race/ethnicity, residential locale, and genetic testing-related outcomes.

RESULTS

Women ranged in age (18-75, M = 39.5, SD = 10.7), and most were non-Hispanic white (66.3%) and lived in a suburban locale (54.9%). Women living in suburban areas were significantly less likely (aOR, .369, 95% CI, .177-.771) to receive behavioral referrals after genetic testing compared to those living in an urban locale. Women living in rural areas and suburban areas were 4.72 times more likely (95% CI, 1.48-15.1, p = .009) and 2.61 times more likely (95% CI, 1.05-6.48, p = .038), respectively, to receive genetic testing from a primary care provider versus private genetic testing office/hospital compared to women in urban locales. Associations between race/ethnicity and genetic testing outcomes were not statistically significant. Residential locale did not predict the odds of undergoing surgery for risk reduction or surveillance for early detection.

CONCLUSION

Our study identifies disparities in genetic testing resources among women living in suburban and rural areas. These findings can be used to inform future care, research, and community resources that may impact services relating to genetic testing within these locales.

A Pooled Electronic Consultation Program to Improve Access to Genetics Specialists

Innovative service delivery models are needed to increase access to genetics specialists. Electronic consultation (e-Consult) programs can connect clinicians with specialists. At Massachusetts General Hospital, an e-Consult service was created to address genomics-related questions. In its first year, the e-Consult service triaged 153 requests and completed 122 in an average of 3.2 days. Of the 95 e-Consults with actionable recommendations, there was documentation that most ordering clinicians followed through (82%). A variety of providers used the service, although the majority (77%) were generalists. E-Consult models should be considered as one way to increase access to genetics care.

Attitudes towards and sociodemographic determinants of genetic test usage in the USA; data from the Health Information National Trend Survey, 2020

The purpose of this study was to examine the trends in who obtains genetic tests, and opinions about how genes affect health. Cross-sectional survey data from Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 5, Cycle 4 was used. This data was collected from adults 18 years of age or older who completed mailed surveys sent by the National Cancer Institute between January and April 2020. The sample consisted of 2,947 respondents who answered the question 'Have you ever had a genetic test'? 727 had a test and 2,220 did not have a test. The measures used included survey questions that asked whether respondents obtained certain kinds of genetic tests, who they shared test results with, whether they believed genes affect health status, and their demographic and cancer status information. Multivariate logistic regression models were developed to assess which demographic variables were associated with having different kinds of genetic tests, and whether those who had genetic tests had different opinions about genetic testing and the influence of genes on health. We found that female respondents [OR: 1.9; CI: (1.2-3.1)] had higher odds of having any genetic tests while Hispanic [OR: 0.5; CI: (0.2-1.0)] respondents had lower odds. Our findings indicate that there are demographic disparities in who received genetic tests, and that cancer risk alone does not explain the differences in prevalence of genetic testing.

Public Health Genetics: Surveying Preparedness for the Next Generation of Public Health Professionals

Since the Human Genome Project's completion in 2003, the need for increased population genetic literacy has grown exponentially. To address this need, public health professionals must be educated appropriately to serve the public best. This study examines the current state of public health genetics education within existing master of public health (MPH) programs. A total of 171 MPH Council on Education for Public Health Accreditation (CEPH)-accredited programs across the nation were identified via a preliminary internet search. The American Public Health Association (APHA) Genomics Forum Policy Committee created 14 survey questions to assess the current status of incorporating genetics/genomics education within MPH programs. Using the Qualtrics survey system through the University of Pittsburgh, a link to the anonymous survey was sent to each director's email address obtained from their program's website. There were 41 survey responses, with 37 finished to completion, for a response rate of 21.6% (37/171). A total of 75.7% (28/37) of respondents reported having courses containing genetics/genomics information in their programs' coursework. Only 12.6% reported such coursework to be required for program completion. Commonly listed barriers to incorporating genetics/genomics include limited faculty knowledge and lack of space in existing courses and programs. Survey results revealed the incongruous and limited incorporation of genetics/genomics within the context of graduate-level public health education. While most recorded programs report offering public health genetics coursework, the extent and requirement of such instruction are not considered necessary for program completion, thereby potentially limiting the genetic literacy of the current pool of public health professionals.

How message appeals and prior product use influence information processing, risk perceptions, trust, attitudes, and genetic test purchase intentions

Within the direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic test industry, attracting customers can be difficult especially due to the highly sensitive nature of these products. How these tests are communicated to consumers may be one avenue in which companies can impact customer purchase intentions. A 2 (message sidedness: one-way vs. two-way refutational) x 2 (hedging: present vs. absent) between-subjects experiment was conducted to understand how message features and prior product use influence information processing, risk and trust perceptions, and attitude toward the genetic test, which in turn, may influence direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic test purchase intentions. Results demonstrated that having used a genetic test in the past predicted participants' trust in the company, information processing, and risk judgments; however, among those who used a genetic test, viewing a message that included hedging tended to increase their trust in the message. Trust in the message and company, information processing, and risk judgments significantly predicted participants' attitudes toward genetic testing, which in turn predicted their purchase intentions. The results suggest that in the context of DTC genetic test messaging, practitioners should strive to increase consumer trust in the message and the company and facilitate information processing, and they should work to diminish perceived risk. These results suggest opportunities for identifying other message features that may influence message and company trust, information processing, risk judgments, and attitudes related to DTC genetic testing.

A personalized genomic results e-booklet, co-designed and pilot-tested by families

Objective

To develop and evaluate a personalizable genomic results e-booklet that helps families understand their genomic testing results and navigate available resources.

Methods

The need for the Genomics Results e-Booklet was identified by families, after which this tool was developed by a team of clinical researchers and three parent-advisors. We customized the genomic results e-booklet for 50 families participating in a genomic sequencing research study. We conducted an assessment using a 19-question survey and semi-structured interviews to elicit feedback and iteratively improve the tool.

Results

25 users provided feedback via questionnaires and seven respondents were interviewed. Genomic Results e-Booklet recipients responded favorably: 96% of participants stated that it helped them remember information shared during their results appointment, 80% said it had or would help them communicate their results with other healthcare providers, 68% felt that it helped to identify and guide their next steps, and 72% anticipated that the e-booklet would have future utility.

Conclusion

The Genomic Results e-Booklet is a patient and family-oriented resource that complements post-test genetic counselling.

Innovation

Compared to traditional laboratory reports and clinical letters, the Genomics Results e-Booklet is patient-conceived and patient-centered, and allows clinicians to efficiently personalize content and prioritize patient understanding and support.

Three Newly Recognized Likely Pathogenic Gene Variants Associated with Hereditary Transthyretin Amyloidosis

INTRODUCTION

Hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTRv [variant]) is a clinically heterogeneous, progressively debilitating, fatal disease resulting from the deposition of insoluble amyloid fibrils in various organs and tissues. Early diagnosis of ATTRv can be facilitated with genetic testing; however, such testing of the TTR gene identifies variants of uncertain significance (VUS) in a minority of cases, a small percentage of which have the potential to be pathogenic. The Akcea/Ambry VUS Initiative is dedicated to gathering molecular, clinical, and inheritance data for each TTR VUS identified by genetic testing programs to reclassify TTR variants to a clinically actionable status (e.g., variant likely pathogenic [VLP]) where appropriate.

METHODS

Classification criteria used here, based on recommendations from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, are stringent and comprehensive, requiring distinct lines of evidence supporting pathogenesis.

RESULTS

Three TTR variants have been reclassified from VUS to VLP, including c.194C>T (p.A65V), c.172G>C (p.D58H), and c.239C>T (p.T80I). In each case, the totality of genetic, structural, and clinical evidence provided strong support for pathogenicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on several lines of evidence, three TTR VUS were reclassified as VLP, resulting in a high likelihood of disease diagnosis for those and subsequent patients as well as at-risk family members.

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: an updated systematic review of healthcare professionals' knowledge and views, and ethical and legal concerns

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) is becoming increasingly widespread. The aim of this research was to systematically review the literature published on healthcare professionals' knowledge and views about DTC-GT, as an update to a 2012 systematic review. The secondary aim was to assess the knowledge and views of healthcare professionals on the ethical and legal issues pertaining to DTC-GT. A systematic search was performed to identify all relevant studies that have been conducted since 2012. Studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria if they were primary research papers conducted on healthcare professionals about their knowledge and views on health-related DTC-GT. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Medline databases were searched from 2012 to May 2021. Title and abstract were screened, and full texts were reviewed by two study authors independently. New papers included were appraised and data were extracted on study characteristics, knowledge and views on DTC-GT, and ethical and legal issues. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Nineteen new papers were included, along with eight papers from the previous review. There was considerable variation in study participants with differing views, awareness levels, and levels of knowledge about DTC-GT. Genetic counsellors and clinical geneticists generally had more concerns, experience, and knowledge regarding DTC-GT. Ten ethical concerns and four legal concerns were identified. Healthcare professionals' knowledge and experience of DTC-GT, including awareness of DTC-GT ethical and legal concerns, have only minimally improved since the previous review. This emphasises the need for further medical learning opportunities to improve the gaps in knowledge amongst healthcare professionals about DTC-GT.

Barriers to family history collection among Spanish-speaking primary care patients: a BRIDGE qualitative study

Objectives

Family history is an important tool for assessing disease risk, and tailoring recommendations for screening and genetic services referral. This study explored barriers to family history collection with Spanish-speaking patients.

Methods

This qualitative study was conducted in two US healthcare systems. We conducted semi-structured interviews with medical assistants, physicians, and interpreters with experience collecting family history for Spanish-speaking patients.

Results

The most common patient-level barrier was the perception that some Spanish-speaking patients had limited knowledge of family history. Interpersonal communication barriers related to dialectical differences and decisions about using formal interpreters vs. Spanish-speaking staff. Organizational barriers included time pressures related to using interpreters, and ad hoc workflow adaptations for Spanish-speaking patients that might leave gaps in family history collection.

Conclusions

This study identified multi-level barriers to family history collection with Spanish-speaking patients in primary care. Findings suggest that a key priority to enhance communication would be to standardize processes for working with interpreters.

Innovation

To improve communication with and care provided to Spanish-speaking patients, there is a need to increase healthcare provider awareness about implicit bias, to address ad hoc workflow adjustments within practice settings, to evaluate the need for professional interpreter services, and to improve digital tools to facilitate family history collection.

General practitioners' (GPs) experience, attitudes and needs on clinical genetic services: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The proliferation and growing demands of genetic testing are anticipated to revolutionise medical practice. As gatekeepers of healthcare systems, general practitioners (GPs) are expected to play a critical role in the provision of clinical genetic services. This paper aims to review existing literature on GPs' experience, attitudes and needs towards clinical genetic services.

DESIGN

A systematic mixed studies review of papers published between 2010 and 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

The inclusion criterion was peer-reviewed articles in English and related to GPs' experience, views and needs on any genetic testing.

INFORMATION SOURCES

The PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane, EMBASE databases were searched using Mesh terms, Boolean and wildcards combinations to identify peer-reviewed articles published from 2010 to 2022. Study quality was assessed using Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Only articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected. A thematic meta-synthesis was conducted on the final sample of selected articles to identify key themes.

RESULTS

A total of 62 articles were included in the review. Uncertainty over GPs' role in providing genetic services were attributed by the lack of confidence and time constraints and rarity of cases may further exacerbate their reluctance to shoulder an expanded role in clinical genetics. Although educational interventions were found to increasing GPs' knowledge and confidence to carry out genetic tasks, varied interest on genetic testing and preference for a shared care model with other genetic health professionals have resulted in minimal translation to clinical adoption.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the need for deeper exploration of GPs' varied experience and attitudes towards clinical genetic services to better facilitate targeted intervention in the adoption of clinical genetics.

Attitudes of Australian dermatologists on the use of genetic testing: A cross-sectional survey with a focus on melanoma

Background: Melanoma genetic testing reportedly increases preventative behaviour without causing psychological harm. Genetic testing for familial melanoma risk is now available, yet little is known about dermatologists' perceptions regarding the utility of testing and genetic testing ordering behaviours. Objectives: To survey Australasian Dermatologists on the perceived utility of genetic testing, current use in practice, as well as their confidence and preferences for the delivery of genomics education. Methods: A 37-item survey, based on previously validated instruments, was sent to accredited members of the Australasian College of Dermatologists in March 2021. Quantitative items were analysed statistically, with one open-ended question analysed qualitatively. Results: The response rate was 56% (256/461), with 60% (153/253) of respondents between 11 and 30 years post-graduation. While 44% (112/252) of respondents agreed, or strongly agreed, that genetic testing was relevant to their practice today, relevance to future practice was reported significantly higher at 84% (212/251) (t = -9.82, p < 0.001). Ninety three percent (235/254) of respondents reported rarely or never ordering genetic testing. Dermatologists who viewed genetic testing as relevant to current practice were more likely to have discussed (p < 0.001) and/or offered testing (p < 0.001). Respondents indicated high confidence in discussing family history of melanoma, but lower confidence in ordering genetic tests and interpreting results. Eighty four percent (207/247) believed that genetic testing could negatively impact life insurance, while only 26% (63/244) were aware of the moratorium on using genetic test results in underwriting in Australia. A minority (22%, 55/254) reported prior continuing education in genetics. Face-to-face courses were the preferred learning modality for upskilling. Conclusion: Australian Dermatologists widely recognise the relevance of genetic testing to future practice, yet few currently order genetic tests. Future educational interventions could focus on how to order appropriate genetic tests and interpret results, as well as potential implications on insurance.

From the patient to the population: Use of genomics for population screening

Genomic medicine is expanding from a focus on diagnosis at the patient level to prevention at the population level given the ongoing under-ascertainment of high-risk and actionable genetic conditions using current strategies, particularly hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC), Lynch Syndrome (LS) and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). The availability of large-scale next-generation sequencing strategies and preventive options for these conditions makes it increasingly feasible to screen pre-symptomatic individuals through public health-based approaches, rather than restricting testing to high-risk groups. This raises anew, and with urgency, questions about the limits of screening as well as the moral authority and capacity to screen for genetic conditions at a population level. We aimed to answer some of these critical questions by using the WHO Wilson and Jungner criteria to guide a synthesis of current evidence on population genomic screening for HBOC, LS, and FH.

Psychometric of Physicians' Awareness, Attitudes and Performance Questionnaire about Genetic Counseling and Testing

INTRODUCTION

Considering the key role of physicians in providing genetic counseling services and the lack of studies in this field in Iran, it seems necessary to design a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the awareness, attitude, and performance of general and specialist physicians in genetic counseling.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this descriptive study, the design and psychometrics of the questionnaire were performed in 4 steps: first, defining the concept of awareness, attitude, and performance of general and specialist physicians in relation to genetic counseling by reviewing texts and articles; second, designing questionnaire items; third, determining the face and content validity by 10 university experts; and forth, determining reliability using Cronbach's alpha coefficient method.

RESULTS

The primary version of the questionnaire was designed taking into account 60 items during the first and second stages. In the third step, one item was removed and in the final version of the questionnaire 59 items and the content validity index (CVI) and content validity ratio (CVR) were reported to be 0.98 and 0.92, respectively. Reliability with Cronbach's alpha coefficient was determined 0.82.

CONCLUSION

The final questionnaire with 59 items had appropriate psychometric properties. This questionnaire has the ability to be used by health care providers in health care systems to measure the awareness, attitude, and performance of physicians about genetic counseling. The need for further studies is suggested to measure the other types of validity, such as the structural validity of the questionnaire.

Ethical Considerations in Precision Medicine and Genetic Testing in Internal Medicine Practice: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians

This American College of Physicians position paper aims to inform ethical decision making for the integration of precision medicine and genetic testing into clinical care. Although the positions are primarily intended for practicing physicians, they may apply to other health care professionals and can also inform how health care systems, professional schools, and residency programs integrate genomics into educational and clinical settings. Addressing the challenges of precision medicine and genetic testing will guide ethical and responsible implementation to improve health outcomes.

Investigating acceptability of a training programme in precision medicine for frontline healthcare professionals: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Precision Medicine offers tailored prevention, diagnosis, treatment and management to patients that considers genomics, lifestyle and environmental factors. If implementation of Precision Medicine is to advance, effective, focused upskilling of frontline healthcare professionals through quality continuing professional development is needed. This study reports on an evidence-based approach to needs assessment to investigate the current level of knowledge of Precision Medicine, acceptable content for training, the perceived potential of a more precision approach to patient care and motivation to participate in a training programme among pharmacists, advanced practice nurses and general practitioners. Investigating perceived needs can avoid a top-down approach and support a design that is fit for purpose to targeted professions.

METHODS

This study reports on 2 focus groups (n = 12) delivered in French and German with equal professional participation of the targeted professions. The research objectives were investigated in two phases. During the first phase, a literature review and expert consultations were conducted to develop a definition of PM, patient cases and content for training. In a second phase, these investigations were further explored using focus groups to investigate acceptable learning objectives, the potential of PM to relevant professions and motivation of participants. Quantitative investigations using rating scales and visual analogues were incorporated. The focus groups were audio recorded, transcribed by intelligent verbatim and translated to English. NVivo was used for data analysis and interpretation following a hybrid approach using the Framework Method and thematic analysis. The analytical framework, Implementation Science, was applied to organise and present research data.

RESULTS

Precision Medicine is considered a new topic area, largely unfamiliar to frontline healthcare professionals.. There was acceptance of a more precision approach to care among all participants with perceived positive implications for patients. Valuable insight was gathered on acceptable content and form for training. All participants expressed concerns on readiness within their professions which included an insufficient system infrastructure, a lack of time to attend needed training, a lack of clarity for use in practice and the time needed to build a support network.

CONCLUSIONS

A precision approach to patient care is on the horizon for health care professionals not only in hospital settings but also at the community level. Our results conclude that an adaptable and flexible training programme in PM is timely, contextually relevant and conducive to the needs of targeted health professions for successful implementation. A training programme in PM will require support across sectors and stakeholders, supporting insurance models, educated patients and integrated care supported by innovative technology. Implementation Science outcomes are a useful strategy towards design of an effective training programme that can have measurable impact in practice.

Outpatient Primary Care Genetic Testing Primer: What to Order and Testing Considerations

The field of genetics has evolved rapidly over the last few decades, from testing methods to genetic diagnoses, bringing new genetic testing guidelines and considerations for health care providers. Overall geneticists are limited in number and availability, particularly in non-academic settings, and many patients first present to a primary care provider. Here, we aim to review various modalities of genetic testing, their indications, limitations, and other pretest considerations for the primary care provider. In addition, we comment on the limitations of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing, which has seen a rise in popularity among the general population.

Anesthesia providers as stakeholders to adoption of pharmacogenomic information in perioperative care

OBJECTIVES

Integration of pharmacogenomics into clinical care is being studied in multiple disciplines. We hypothesized that understanding attitudes and perceptions of anesthesiologists, critical care and pain medicine providers would uncover unique considerations for future implementation within perioperative care.

METHODS

A survey (multiple choice and Likert-scale) was administered to providers within our Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care prior to initiation of a department-wide prospective pharmacogenomics implementation program. The survey addressed knowledge, perceptions, experiences, resources and barriers.

RESULTS

Of 153 providers contacted, 149 (97%) completed the survey. Almost all providers (92%) said that genetic results influence drug therapy, and few (22%) were skeptical about the usefulness of pharmacogenomics. Despite this enthusiasm, 87% said their awareness about pharmacogenomic information is lacking. Feeling well-informed about pharmacogenomics was directly related to years in practice/experience: only 38% of trainees reported being well-informed, compared to 46% of those with 1-10 years of experience, and nearly two-thirds with 11+ years (P < 0.05). Regarding barriers, providers reported uncertainty about availability of testing, turnaround time and whether testing is worth financial costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Anesthesiology, critical care and pain medicine providers are optimistic about the potential clinical utility of pharmacogenomics, but are uncertain about practical aspects of testing and desire clear guidelines on the use of results. These findings may inform future institutional efforts toward greater integration of genomic results to improve medication-related outcomes.

Considerations for developing regulations for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a scoping review using the 3-I framework

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing exists largely outside of any regulatory schemes, and studies providing a comprehensive overview of the ethical, social, legal, and technological considerations for regulating these types of technologies are lacking. This paper uses the 3-I framework for policy analysis to analyze the ideas, interests, and institutions relevant to policy development for DTC genetic testing in North America and internationally. A scoping review was conducted. Citation databases were searched for papers addressing the ethical, social, legal, and technological implications of DTC genetic testing; stakeholder perspectives on and experiences with DTC genetic testing; or the effect of such testing on the healthcare system. Ninety-nine publications, organizational reports, governmental documents, or pieces of legislation were included. The ideas included are autonomy, informed decision making, privacy, and clinical validity and utility. The interests discussed are those of the public and healthcare providers. The institutions included are regulatory organizations such as the Food and Drug Administration in the United States, laws governing the implementation or delivery of genetic testing in general, and legislation created to protect against genetic discrimination. This analysis clarifies the ethical, social, legal, and technological issues of DTC genetic testing regulation. This information can be used by policy makers to develop or strengthen regulations for DTC genetic testing such as requiring an assessment of the clinical validity of tests before they become publicly available, controlling how tests are marketed, and stipulating requirements for healthcare provider involvement and informed consent.

Vignette-Based Reflections to Inform Genetic Testing Policies in Living Kidney Donors

Family history of kidney disease increases risk of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in donors. Pre-donation genetic testing is recommended in evaluation guidelines and regulatory policy. Collaborating across several institutions, we describe cases to illustrate the utility as well as practical issues in incorporating genetic testing in transplant protocols. Case 1 is from 2009, before pervasive genetic testing. A healthy 27-year-old Caucasian male had an uneventful donor evaluation for his mother, who had early onset ESKD of unclear cause. He participated in paired-exchange kidney donation, but developed progressive kidney disease and gout over the next 10 years. A uromodulin gene mutation (NM_003361.3(UMOD):c.377 G>A p.C126Y) was detected and kidney biopsy showed tubulointerstitial kidney disease. The patient subsequently required kidney transplantation himself. Case 2 was a 36-year-old African American female who had an uneventful kidney donor evaluation. She underwent gene panel-based testing to rule out ApolipoproteinL1 risk variants, for which was negative. Incidentally, a sickle-cell trait (NM_000518.5(HBB):c.20A>T p.Glu7Val) was noted, and she was declined for kidney donation. This led to significant patient anguish. Case 3 was a 26-year-old Caucasian female who underwent panel-based testing because the potential recipient, her cousin, carried a variant of uncertain significance in the hepatocyte nuclear factor-1-β (HNF1B) gene. While the potential donor did not harbor this variant, she was found to have a likely pathogenic variant in complement factor I (NM_000204.4(CFI):c.1311dup:p.Asp438Argfs*8), precluding kidney donation. Our cases emphasize that while genetic testing can be invaluable in donor evaluation, transplant centers should utilize detailed informed consent, develop care pathways for secondary genetic findings, and share experience to develop best practices around genetic testing in donors.

Primary Care Providers' Use of Genetic Services in the Southeast United States: Barriers, Facilitators, and Strategies

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

Collectively, genetic diseases are not that rare, and with increasing availability of genetics-informed healthcare management, primary care providers (PCPs) are more often asked to screen for or provide genetic services. Previous studies have identified barriers that impact PCPs' ability to provide genetic services, including limited knowledge, training, and time/resources. This study set out to identify specific barriers limiting genetics service provision by PCPs within the Southeastern Regional Genetics Network (SERN) and resources that would help eliminate those barriers.

METHODS

PCPs were recruited through provider networks and invited to participate in semi-structured interviews, conducted via Zoom, recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Interview transcripts were independently coded by 2 coders using MAXQDA software. Thematic analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Eleven interviews were conducted. Three predominant themes emerged from the data regarding factors impacting use of genetic services: system-wide factors, provider-specific factors, and patient factors. System-wide barriers included a lack of genetics providers and logistic challenges, which led to some PCPs coordinating referrals with other specialists or independently managing patients. Regarding provider-specific barriers, PCPs reported lack of genetics knowledge making referrals challenging. When possible, many PCPs contacted genetics providers for assistance. When not possible, some PCPs reached out to other colleagues or specialists for guidance. Patient-specific barriers included concerns or lack of information regarding genetics and unmet social needs. Many PCPs provided additional education regarding genetics appointments or testing benefits to their patients. Assistance from genetic counselors, electronic medical record systems that support referral to genetics, prior experience referring to genetics, established communication channels with genetics professionals, and highly motivated patients all facilitated improved collaboration with genetic services. PCPs provided suggestions for future resources to support interactions with genetics, including clear referral guidelines, increased access to genetics providers, improved test ordering processes, increased access to genetic education, and communication systems.

CONCLUSIONS

PCPs face barriers at 3 different levels when engaging with genetic services: systems, providers, and patients. This study identified strategies that PCPs use to address these barriers, which are dependent on individual resources and practice settings. These strategies demonstrate resourcefulness in working to incorporate genetics into clinics operating at maximum capacity. By targeting barriers that uniquely impact providers, systems, and patients, as well as building upon strategies that PCPs are already using, medical providers can support PCPs to help with the provision of genetic services.

Utilization of genetic testing: Analysis of 4,499 prior authorization requests for molecular genetic tests at four US regional health plans

Continuous advances in genetic testing methodologies and an increased understanding of the genetic mechanisms of diseases have fueled genetic testing utilization across health care specialties. To our knowledge, national trends in the ordering of genetic testing have not been studied broadly across clinical indications, testing methodologies, and ordering provider specialties. We performed a retrospective analysis of 4,499 complete prior authorization requests for molecular genetic testing submitted to four regional health plans' commercial lines of business between May 1, 2019 and May 31, 2019. Ordering providers were characterized by their certification(s) and specialty of practice. Among 4,499 genetic testing requests, 92% were ordered by non-genetics providers. Obstetrician/gynecology (OBGYN) (63%), oncology (15%), and genetics (8%) providers ordered genetic testing most frequently. Reproductive, hereditary cancer, and tumor testing were the most frequently ordered genetic tests. Seventy-nine percent of all prior authorization requests were approved. When analyzing complex genetic testing requests, we found that testing ordered by genetics providers was more likely to be approved based on health plan policy than testing ordered by non-genetics providers. Our results suggest that health care providers across multiple medical specialties may benefit from involvement of genetics specialists in decision-making regarding molecular tests.

The Genetic Testing Stewardship Program:

Genetic/genomic testing can reveal important diagnostic information, provided the appropriate test is chosen and the results are interpreted accurately. Choosing an informative, cost-effective genetic testing strategy is a complex process. Nemours’ Genetic Testing Stewardship Program (GTSP) is a genetic counselor-staffed consultative service serving the Nemours Children’s Health (NCH) system. This program assists non-genetics providers and their patients access genetic testing for improved patient care and reduced costs. GTSP genetic counselors provide pre- and post-test genetic counseling, obtain informed consent, ensure complete documentation, and provide results interpretation/disclosure support for ordering providers. Implementation of this program began with genetic testing needs assessments and presentations about this novel service at subspecialty division meetings. GTSP expanded at NCH Delaware and NCH Orlando to include review of inpatient genetic testing for medical necessity. GTSP has experienced success from provider satisfaction and cost savings perspectives. GTSP has produced cost savings of >$400,000, supporting financial sustainability of the program. Additionally, genetic counselors bill for visits, creating the foundation for a future revenue stream which is likely to increase as reimbursement for genetic counseling services improves. GTSP has become integral in the NCH system by improving patient access to genetic testing in a safe, efficient, effective manner.

Electronic Health Records and Genomics: Perspectives from the Association for Molecular Pathology Electronic Health Record (EHR) Interoperability for Clinical Genomics Data Working Group

The use of genomics in medicine is expanding rapidly, but information systems are lagging in their ability to support genomic workflows both from the laboratory and patient-facing provider perspective. The complexity of genomic data, the lack of needed data standards, and lack of genomic fluency and functionality as well as several other factors have contributed to the gaps between genomic data generation, interoperability, and utilization. These gaps are posing significant challenges to laboratory and pathology professionals, clinicians, and patients in the ability to generate, communicate, consume, and use genomic test results. The Association for Molecular Pathology Electronic Health Record Working Group was convened to assess the challenges and opportunities and to recommend solutions on ways to resolve current problems associated with the display and use of genomic data in electronic health records.

Evaluating Primary Care Providers' Readiness for Delivering Genetic and Genomic Services to Underserved Populations

INTRODUCTION

Increased genomics knowledge and access are advancing precision medicine and care delivery. With the translation of precision medicine across health care, genetics and genomics will play a greater role in primary care services. Health disparities and inadequate representation of racial and ethnically diverse groups threaten equitable access for those historically underserved. Health provider awareness, knowledge, and perceived importance are important determinants of the utilization of genomic applications.

METHODS

We evaluated the readiness of primary care providers at a Federally Qualified Health Center, the Community Health Center, Inc. (CHCI) for delivering genetic and genomic testing to underserved populations. Online survey questions focused on providers' education and training in basic and clinical genetics, familiarity with current genetic tests, and needs for incorporating genetics and genomics into their current practice.

RESULTS

Fifty of 77 (65%) primary care providers responded to the survey. Less than half received any training in basic or clinical genetics (40%), were familiar with specific genetic tests (36%), or felt confident with collecting family health history (44%), and 70% believed patients would benefit from genetic testing.

CONCLUSION

Despite knowledge gaps, respondents recognized the value and need to bring these services to their patients, though would like more education on applying genetics and genomics into their practice, and more training about discussing risk factors associated with race or ethnicity. We provide further evidence of the need for educational resources and standardized guidelines for providers caring for underserved populations to optimize appropriate use and referral of genetic and genomic services and to reduce disparities in care.

The 2019 US medical genetics workforce: a focus on clinical genetics

PURPOSE

This study characterizes the US clinical genetics workforce to inform workforce planning and public policy development.

METHODS

A 32-question survey was electronically distributed to American Board of Medical Genetics and Genomics board-certified/eligible diplomates in 2019. We conducted a descriptive analysis of responses from practicing clinical geneticists.

RESULTS

Of the 491 clinical geneticists responding to the survey, a majority were female (59%) and White (79%), worked in academic medical centers (73%), and many engaged in telemedicine (33%). Clinical geneticists reported an average of 13 new and 10 follow-up patient visits per week. The average work week was 50 hours and the majority (58%) worked over half-time in clinical duties. Providers indicated that 39% of new emergency patients wait 3 days or more, and 39% of nonemergency patients wait over 3 months to be seen. Respondents were geographically concentrated in metropolitan areas and many reported unfilled clinical geneticist job vacancies at their institution of more than 3 years.

CONCLUSION

With the rapid expansion of genomic medicine in the past decade, there is still a gap between genetics services needed and workforce capacity. A concerted effort is required to increase the number of clinical geneticists and enhance interdisciplinary teamwork to meet increasing patient needs.

How practice setting affects family physicians' views on genetic screening: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Genetic screening (GS), defined as the clinical testing of a population to identify asymptomatic individuals with the aim of providing those identified as high risk with prevention, early treatment, or reproductive options. Genetic screening (GS) improves patient outcomes and is accessible to the community. Family physicians (FPs) are ideally placed to offer GS. There is a need for FPs to adopt GS to address anticipated genetic specialist shortages.

OBJECTIVE

To explore FP attitudes, perceived roles, motivators and barriers, towards GS; and explore similarities and differences between private and public sector FPs.

METHODS

We developed a semi-structured interview guide using existing literature. We interviewed private and public sector FPs recruited by purposive, convenience and snowballing strategies, by telephone or video to theme saturation. All sessions were audio-recorded, transcribed and coded for themes by two independent researchers with an adjudicator.

RESULTS

Thirty FPs were interviewed (15 private, 15 public). Theme saturation was reached for each group. A total of 12 themes (6 common, 3 from private-practice participants, 3 public-employed participants) emerged. Six common major themes emerged: personal lack of training and experience, roles and relevance of GS to family medicine, reluctance and resistance to adding GS to practice, FP motivations for adoption, patient factors as barrier, and potential solutions. Three themes (all facilitators) were unique to the private group: strong rapport with patients, high practice autonomy, and high patient literacy. Three themes (all barriers) were unique to the public group: lack of control, patients' lower socioeconomic status, and rigid administrative infrastructure.

CONCLUSION

FPs are motivated to incorporate GS but need support for implementation. Policy-makers should consider the practice setting when introducing new screening functions. Strategies to change FP behaviours should be sensitive to their sense of autonomy, and the external factors (either as facilitators or as barriers) shaping FP practices in a given clinical setting.

Physician awareness, preparedness, and opinions toward consumer-initiated genetic testing in Thailand: Views from a changing landscape

Consumer-initiated genetic tests have captured public interest in recent years, including in low-to-middle-income countries (LMICs) such as Thailand. Due to limited resources and personnel, physicians will most likely bear the burden of increasing service needs from the public as consumer-initiated genetic tests become popularized. The primary objective of this study was to describe (a) awareness, (b) preparedness to provide counseling about the consumer-initiated genetic test, and (c) opinions on the usefulness of consumer-initiated genetic tests among physicians at an academic hospital in Bangkok, Thailand. The secondary objective was to describe factors that were associated with the awareness, preparedness, and opinion of the participants. Paper questionnaires were sent out to participants which included internal medicine residents, fellows, and faculty staff members. The questionnaires assessed awareness, preparedness to discuss consumer-initiated genetic test results, and opinion on the usefulness of consumer-initiated genetic tests and included both closed- and open-ended questions. Responses were anonymous. Among 308 participants, there were 223 (72.4%) residents, 14 (4.5%) fellows, and 71 (23.1%) staff members. Only 15% of participants were aware of consumer-initiated genetic tests, mostly from the internet, and only 7% were prepared to provide counseling regarding consumer-initiated genetic tests. However, 60% agreed that consumer-initiated genetic tests may be clinically useful. Many participants, including trainees, expressed concerns about the interpretation of consumer-initiated genetic test results, application into clinical practice, appropriate counseling, and patient referral to geneticists. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that years of work experience was independently associated with awareness of consumer-initiated genetic tests, while male gender and less work experience were independently associated with favorable opinion toward the usefulness of consumer-initiated genetic tests. Our results pointed to an urgent need for genetic counselors in Thailand. Also, physicians, particularly trainees, need appropriate training to prepare them for a rapidly evolving environment where consumer-initiated genetic tests become commonplace.

Pitfalls and challenges in genetic test interpretation: An exploration of genetic professionals experience with interpretation of results

The interpretation of genetic testing results is subject to error. This observational study illustrates examples of pitfalls and challenges in interpretation of genetic testing results as reported by genetics professionals. We surveyed genetics professionals to describe interpretation challenges, the types of variants that were involved, and the reported clinical impact of misconception of a test result. Case studies were then collected from a select group to further explore potential causes of misunderstanding. A total of 83% of survey respondents were aware of at least one instance of genetic test misinterpretation. Both professionals with and without formal training in genetics were challenged by test reports, and variants of unknown significance were most frequently involved. Case submissions revealed that interpretation pitfalls extend beyond variant classification analyses. Inferred challenges in case submissions include lack of genetic counseling, unclear wording of reports, and suboptimal communication among providers. Respondents and case submitters noted that incorrect interpretation can trigger unnecessary follow-up tests and improperly alter clinical management. Further research is needed to validate and quantify large-scale data regarding challenges of genetic results interpretation.