Use of a Patient-Entered Family Health History Tool with Decision Support in Primary Care: Impact of Identification of Increased Risk Patients on Genetic Counseling Attendance

Leveraging Electronic Health Record Data to Understand Gaps Underlying the Underdiagnosis of Lynch Syndrome

Using the electronic health record to address the underdiagnosis of Lynch syndrome.

A practical method for integrating community priorities in planning and implementing cancer control programs

PURPOSE

Community engagement is essential in effective public health programs. This paper illustrates the methods used to engage community in the development of a multi-level implementation intervention to address cancer disparities related to hereditary cancer syndromes.

METHODS

Implementation Mapping (IM), was used to guide the co-creation of an intervention. Key partners were recruited to a 13-member statewide community advisory board (CAB) representing healthcare and community-based organizations. As part of a needs assessment, a 3-round modified Delphi method with the CAB was used to identify implementation outcomes to use in later steps of IM. An anonymous online survey of a validated community engagement measure assessed CAB members' satisfaction with the process.

RESULTS

Using a modified Delphi method as part of the needs assessment of IM, the CAB identified three broad categories of strategies: Changing infrastructure using patient navigation; training and educating patients, navigators and providers; and supporting clinicians in case identification and management. Self-reported satisfaction with the IM and Delphi process was high.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation Mapping facilitated the use of available evidence, new data, and community engagement to identify strategies to improve the delivery of programs to reduce hereditary cancer disparities. The modified Delphi method was easy to administer in a virtual environment and may be a useful for others in community-engaged research.

Implementing digital systems to facilitate genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes: An observational study of 4 clinical workflows

PURPOSE

National efforts have prioritized the identification of effective methods for increasing case ascertainment and delivery of evidence-based health care for individuals at elevated risk for hereditary cancers.

METHODS

This study examined the uptake of genetic counseling and testing following the use of a digital cancer genetic risk assessment program implemented at 27 health care sites in 10 states using 1 of 4 clinical workflows: (1) traditional referral, (2) point-of-care scheduling, (3) point-of-care counseling/telegenetics, and (4) point-of-care testing.

RESULTS

In 2019, 102,542 patients were screened and 33,113 (32%) were identified as at high risk and meeting National Comprehensive Cancer Network genetic testing criteria for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome, or both. Among those identified at high risk, 5147 (16%) proceeded with genetic testing. Genetic counseling uptake was 11% among the sites with workflows that included seeing a genetic counselor before testing, with 88% of patients proceeding with genetic testing after counseling. Uptake of genetic testing across sites varied significantly by clinical workflow (6% referral, 10% point-of-care scheduling, 14% point-of-care counseling/telegenetics, and 35% point-of-care testing, P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Study findings highlight the potential heterogeneity of effectiveness attributable to different care delivery approaches for implementing digital hereditary cancer risk screening programs.

Identification of individuals at high-risk for pancreatic cancer using a digital patient-input tool combining family cancer history screening and new-onset diabetes

Capturing family history might be a valuable tool for identification of individuals at increased risk of pancreatic cancer, which would allow enrollment into pancreatic surveillance programs. In addition, weight loss and concurrent new-onset diabetes may be utilized as an early marker for pancreatic cancer. This study evaluates the yield of combining family history and the Enriching New-Onset Diabetes for Pancreatic Cancer (ENDPAC) model to identify individuals who could benefit from pancreatic surveillance. A novel questionnaire and digital input tool was created that combined questions on family cancer history and criteria of the ENDPAC model. Individuals meeting ENDPAC criteria were enrolled directly in the high-risk pancreatic clinic. Individuals who met the criteria for a significant family history of cancer were offered referral to a genetic counselor. The questionnaire was completed by 453 patients. Of those, 25.8% (117/453) had significant familial risk factors. Eighteen individuals (15.4%) completed genetic testing previously, of whom five had a pathogenic variant. Thirty-four (29.9%) out of 117 individuals with a strong family history - flagged by the questionnaire - underwent genetic testing. Four (11.8%) of these patients harbored a pathogenic variant. Additionally, through cascade family testing, two siblings were found to carry pathogenic variants. Four (0.9%) of the 453 patients matched ENDPAC criteria. Two were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and the others were enrolled in the surveillance program. In conclusion, identification of high-risk individuals for pancreatic cancer can be achieved by combining family history screening and the ENDPAC model to facilitate referral to genetic counseling and high-risk clinics.

Establishing a process to improve the collection of family health history

ABSTRACT

Knowledge of a person's potential to inherit certain diseases has rapidly become a valuable part of the discussion between provider and patient. Knowing the risk of hereditary disorders allows providers to include screening and diagnostic tests in a timely way. The family heath history is an easy and important tool for identification of risk for genetic diseases, including cancers. A project, which incorporated patient education and technology, was developed to improve the collection of family health history and identify high-risk patients for genetic cancers and/or diseases.

Physicians' strategies for using family history data: having the data is not the same as using the data

Objective

To identify needs in a clinical decision support tool development by exploring how primary care providers currently collect and use family health history (FHH).

Design

Survey questionnaires and semi-structured interviews were administered to a mix of primary and specialty care clinicians within the University of Utah Health system (40 surveys, 12 interviews).

Results

Three key themes emerged regarding providers' collection and use of FHH: (1) Strategies for collecting FHH vary by level of effort; (2) Documentation practices extend beyond the electronic health record's dedicated FHH module; and (3) Providers desire feedback from genetic services consultation and are uncertain how to refer patients to genetic services.

Conclusion

Study findings highlight the varying degrees of engagement that providers have with collecting FHH. Improving the integration of FHH into workflow, and providing decision support, as well as links and tools to help providers better utilize genetic counseling may improve patient care.

Effectiveness of patient-targeted interventions to inform decision making and improve uptake of colorectal cancer genetic evaluation for at-risk individuals: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Inherited colorectal cancer syndromes increase the risk of contracting colorectal and other cancers. International guidelines recommend the identification of individuals with hereditary colorectal cancer and the supervision of asymptomatic individuals with a family history. However, detection of hereditary colorectal cancer is suboptimal. The prevalence of genetic counselling and testing for individuals with high genetic risk is low.

OBJECTIVE

To identify, characterize and summarize patient-targeted interventions on improving the uptake of colorectal cancer genetic evaluation for at-risk individuals and enhancing their informed decision making.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCES

Six electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane library) were searched to identify eligible clinical trials from each database's inception to March 25, 2020. The reference lists of the included studies and reviews were checked for additional articles.

REVIEW METHODS

Studies were screened and independently appraised by two reviewers using the standardized critical appraisal checklist for randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies from the Joanna Briggs Institute. The results were tabulated and reported in descriptive format.

RESULTS

Based on the inclusion criteria, 8 articles satisfied the inclusion criteria and were included. The studies examined patient-targeted intervention strategies related to risk assessment, education, and decision aids. Outcomes included (1) informed decisions regarding microsatellite instability testing, (2) informed decisions concerning genetic testing, (3) genetic counselling and testing. Most of the included studies revealed that interventions had positive effects on the uptake of colorectal cancer genetic evaluation for at-risk individuals and their informed decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

There were few studies included in this review, and the results were inconsistent. Based on this review, the conclusion cannot be made that interventions for risk assessment, education, and decision aids have positive effects on the uptake of colorectal cancer genetic evaluation for at-risk individuals and their informed decision making. However, to our knowledge, this is the first systematic review to summarize the effectiveness of patient-targeted interventions to inform decision making and improve uptake of colorectal cancer genetic evaluation for at-risk individuals. This review provides important evidence for related topics. Future studies with rigorous designs are recommended. Nurses have a crucial role in personalized health care. The involvement of nurses in collaboration with all the stakeholders in the development, implementation and evaluation of cancer genetic screening programs to improve genetic referral of individual at risk.

Patient experience with family history tool: analysis of patients' experience sharing their family health history through patient-computer dialogue in a patient portal

OBJECTIVE

The collection and use of a family health history are important for assessing the patient's risk of disease, but history taking is often impeded by practical barriers in the office. Provision for patient-computer dialogue, linked with the electronic health record, may enable patients to contribute their history while bypassing these barriers. We sought to assess the patient experience using such a tool.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We linked the family history module of a computer-based medical history to the patient portal of a large academic health system. The interview consisted of 39 primary questions with a predetermined high test-retest reliability. Patients' results were structured and summarized, and available within their electronic health record. Patients optionally completed a survey about their experience. We inductively analyzed free-text responses collected between 2014 and 2016.

RESULTS

Among 97 781 patient portal users, 9562 patients accessed and 4223 patients completed the family medical history interview. Of these patients, 1451 completed our survey. Main themes that were identified included (1) patient empowerment, (2) anticipated value, (3) validity concerns, (4) privacy concerns, and (5) reflections on patient-computer dialogue. Patients also provided suggestions for the improvement of future family history tools.

DISCUSSION

Patients providing their family health information is an example of collaborative electronic work with clinicians and was seen as valuable by those who participated. Concerns related to contextual information and uncertainty need to be addressed.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-computer dialogue to collect family medical history empowered patients and added perceived value and efficiency to the patient experience of care.

Applying theory to characterize impediments to dissemination of community-facing family health history tools: a review of the literature

Uptake of community-facing family health history (FHH) tools to identify those at highest risk of disease and target prevention efforts has been consistently low. This review uses the diffusion of innovations (DOI) as a framework to organize the FHH evidence base and identify potential strategies to improve uptake of community-facing FHH tools. Methods for this literature review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. We completed systematic searches in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for studies from 2009 to 2017 and hand searched bibliographies of relevant literature to identify additional articles. We abstracted and synthesized results, which were then organized by the DOI including the innovation-decision making process and characteristics of the innovation likely to influence diffusion (e.g., compatibility, relative advantage, complexity, trialability, observa/bility). Of the 290 unique articles identified, 65 were eligible for full-text review after title and abstract screening; a total of 27 were included in the final abstraction. Eleven unique tools were identified. The most commonly used tool was the Surgeon General's My Family Health Portrait (n =9/27). Only six studies directly evaluated participant perceptions shown to be associated with tool uptake. Studies tended to focus on improving compatibility by customizing tools to the target population's needs and use of educational interventions. Results from this review suggest the need to evaluate strategies to increase the pace of uptake of community-facing FHH tools. These include pragmatic trials that compare different approaches to engage and evaluate participant perceptions of the relative advantage and complexity of tools. Ancillary support strategies may include collaborations with community networks to facilitate use and implementation study designs for rigorous evaluation.

A comparative study of patients' perceptions of genetic and genomic medicine services in California and Malaysia

In the era of personalized and genomic medicine, awareness of patients with rare diseases is increasing as new approaches to diagnosis and treatment are developed. This study examined perceived barriers experienced by families with rare diseases and explored possible differences between participants in Malaysia and California, USA. The study involved N = 108 participants recruited in genetics clinic appointments at the University of Malaya Medical Center and three sites in Southern California. Participants completed a survey involving multiple choice and Likert scale items pertaining to perceived barriers to access genetics-related healthcare. Results from this study provide evidence of similar perceived barriers, despite differences in the two populations. Participants selected the expansion of healthcare provider knowledge of rare diseases to be the most beneficial approach to overcome perceived barriers. In both locations, it was also noted that travel distance to clinic was not perceived as a large stress factor. Taking these observations together, a healthcare model with a central location of providers well-versed in medical genetics may be considered if further data support our findings. The data from this study support a need for improving healthcare provider knowledge of genetics. Future studies exploring how these perceived stress factors are impacting families as well as different methods of educating providers are suggested by findings from the study, as well as studies querying the opinions of those who are unable to access genetics services.

Delivering genomic medicine in the United Kingdom National Health Service: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

PURPOSE

We sought to assess the readiness of the United Kingdom (UK) National Health Service to implement a Genomic Medicine Service. We conducted a systematic literature review to identify what is known about factors related to the implementation of genomic medicine in routine health care and to draw out the implications for the UK and other settings.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified in Web of Science and PubMed from their date of inception to April 2018. The review included primary research studies using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods, and systematic reviews. A narrative synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

Fifty-five studies met our inclusion criteria. The majority of studies reviewed were conducted in the United States. We identified four domains: (1) systems, (2) training and workforce needs, (3) professional attitudes and values, and (4) the role of patients and the public.

CONCLUSION

Mainstreaming genomic medicine into routine clinical practice requires actions at each level of the health-care system. Our synthesis emphasized the organizational, social, and cultural implications of reforming practice, highlighting that demonstration of clinical utility and cost-effectiveness, attending to the compatibility of genomic medicine with clinical principles, and involving and engaging patients are key to successful implementation.

A model for patient-direct screening and referral for familial cancer risk

Patients at increased familial risk of cancer are sub-optimally identified and referred for genetic counseling. We describe a systematic model for information collection, screening and referral for hereditary cancer risk. Individuals from three different clinical and research populations were screened for hereditary cancer risk using a two-tier process: a 7-item screener followed by review of family history by a genetic counselor and application of published criteria. A total of 869 subjects participated in the study; 769 in this high risk population had increased familial cancer risk based on the screening questionnaire. Of these eligible participants, 500 (65.0 %) provided family histories and 332 (66.4 %) of these were found to be at high risk of a hereditary cancer syndrome, 102 (20.4 %) at moderate familial cancer risk, and 66 (13.2 %) at average risk. Three months following receipt of the risk result letter, nearly all respondents found the process at least somewhat helpful (98.4 %). All participants identified as high-risk were mailed a letter recommending genetic counseling and were provided appointment tools. After 1 year, only 13 (7.3 %) of 179 high risk respondents reported pursuit of recommended genetic counseling. Participants were willing to provide family history information for the purposes of risk assessment; however, few patients pursued recommended genetic services. This suggests that cancer family history registries are feasible and viable but that further research is needed to increase the uptake of genetic counseling.

Family health history: an essential starting point for personalized risk assessment and disease prevention

Family health history (FHH) information is well established as a basis for assessing a patient's personal disease risk, but is underutilized for diagnosis and making medical recommendations. Epidemiological and genetic information have heightened the value of FHH to an individual's health. This has motivated the development of new FHH collection tools and strategies for family members, but will require greater awareness and knowledge by both patients and practitioners. FHH will be increasingly important as genomic data become a mainstay of medical diagnostics, since in many cases, a medically important FHH results from lineage-specific genetic variants. The impact of complementary FHH and genomic information will drive the pursuit of personalized and precise targeting of treatments and interventions aimed at maintaining patient health.

Protocol for the "Implementation, adoption, and utility of family history in diverse care settings" study

Background

Risk assessment with a thorough family health history is recommended by numerous organizations and is now a required component of the annual physical for Medicare beneficiaries under the Affordable Care Act. However, there are several barriers to incorporating robust risk assessments into routine care. MeTree, a web-based patient-facing health risk assessment tool, was developed with the aim of overcoming these barriers. In order to better understand what factors will be instrumental for broader adoption of risk assessment programs like MeTree in clinical settings, we obtained funding to perform a type III hybrid implementation-effectiveness study in primary care clinics at five diverse healthcare systems. Here, we describe the study’s protocol.

Methods/design

MeTree collects personal medical information and a three-generation family health history from patients on 98 conditions. Using algorithms built entirely from current clinical guidelines, it provides clinical decision support to providers and patients on 30 conditions. All adult patients with an upcoming well-visit appointment at one of the 20 intervention clinics are eligible to participate. Patient-oriented risk reports are provided in real time. Provider-oriented risk reports are uploaded to the electronic medical record for review at the time of the appointment. Implementation outcomes are enrollment rate of clinics, providers, and patients (enrolled vs approached) and their representativeness compared to the underlying population. Primary effectiveness outcomes are the percent of participants newly identified as being at increased risk for one of the clinical decision support conditions and the percent with appropriate risk-based screening. Secondary outcomes include percent change in those meeting goals for a healthy lifestyle (diet, exercise, and smoking). Outcomes are measured through electronic medical record data abstraction, patient surveys, and surveys/qualitative interviews of clinical staff.

Discussion

This study evaluates factors that are critical to successful implementation of a web-based risk assessment tool into routine clinical care in a variety of healthcare settings. The result will identify resource needs and potential barriers and solutions to implementation in each setting as well as an understanding potential effectiveness.

Trial registration

NCT01956773

Community-Based Family Health History Education: The Role of State Health Agencies in Engaging Medically Underserved Populations in Understanding Genomics and Risk of Chronic Disease

Although family health history (FHH) collection has been recognized as an influential method for assessing a person's risk of chronic disease, studies have shown that people who are low-income, from racial and ethnic minorities, and poorly educated are less likely to collect their FHH or share it with a medical professional. Programs to raise public awareness about the importance of FHH have conventionally targeted patients in primary care clinics or in the general community, but few efforts have been made to coordinate educational efforts across settings. This paper describes a project by the Connecticut Department of Public Health's Genomics Office to disseminate training materials about FHH as broadly as possible, by engaging partners in multiple settings: a local health department, a community health center, and two advocacy organizations that serve minority and immigrant populations. We used a mixed methods program evaluation to examine the efficacy of the FHH program and to assess barriers in integrating it into the groups' regular programming. Our findings highlight how a state health department can promote FHH education among underserved communities.

Securing and Documenting Cancer Family History in the Age of the Electronic Medical Record

Family health history is one of the least expensive, most useful, and most underused methods available to conduct assessments of the genetic aspect of a condition or to target the need for a genetic evaluation. This article introduces to the surgical oncologist the reason and process of collecting family history information. As medical records shift from paper to electronic formats, pedigree drawings are not readily available within the electronic health records. International efforts are underway to develop searchable, updatable, and interoperable formats that can collect family history information to inform clinical decision support for genetic risk assessment.

Perspectives on genetic and genomic technologies in an academic medical center: the duke experience

In this age of personalized medicine, genetic and genomic testing is expected to become instrumental in health care delivery, but little is known about its actual implementation in clinical practice.

METHODS

We surveyed Duke faculty and healthcare providers to examine the extent of genetic and genomic testing adoption. We assessed providers' use of genetic and genomic testing options and indications in clinical practice, providers' awareness of pharmacogenetic applications, and providers' opinions on returning research-generated genetic test results to participants. Most clinician respondents currently use family history routinely in their clinical practice, but only 18 percent of clinicians use pharmacogenetics. Only two respondents correctly identified the number of drug package inserts with pharmacogenetic indications. We also found strong support for the return of genetic research results to participants. Our results demonstrate that while Duke healthcare providers are enthusiastic about genomic technologies, use of genomic tools outside of research has been limited. Respondents favor return of research-based genetic results to participants, but clinicians lack knowledge about pharmacogenetic applications. We identified challenges faced by this institution when implementing genetic and genomic testing into patient care that should inform a policy and education agenda to improve provider support and clinician-researcher partnerships.

Perceptions of Personalized Medicine in an Academic Health System: Educational Findings

OBJECTIVE

Prior reports demonstrate that personalized medicine implementation in clinical care is lacking. Given the program focus at Duke University on personalized medicine, we assessed health care providers' perspectives on their preparation and educational needs to effectively integrate personalized medicine tools and applications into their clinical practices.

METHODS

Data from 78 health care providers who participated in a larger study of personalized and precision medicine at Duke University were analyzed using Qualtrics (descriptive statistics). Individuals age 18 years and older were recruited for the larger study through broad email contacts across the university and health system. All participants completed an online 35-question survey that was developed, pilot-tested, and administered by a team of interdisciplinary researchers and clinicians at the Center for Applied Genomics and Precision Medicine.

RESULTS

Overall, providers reported being ill-equipped to implement personalized medicine in clinical practice. Many respondents identified educational resources as critical for strengthening personalized medicine implementation in both research and clinical practice. Responses did not differ significantly between specialists and primary providers or by years since completion of the medical degree.

CONCLUSIONS

Survey findings support prior calls for provider and patient education in personalized medicine. Respondents identified focus areas in training, education, and research for improving personalized medicine uptake. Given respondents' emphasis on educational needs, now may be an ideal time to address these needs in clinical training and public education programs.