1
|
Birchley G, Bertram W, Moore AJ, Huxtable R, Howells N, Chivers Z, Johnson E, Wylde V, Jones L, Timlin T, Gooberman-Hill R. In risk we trust? Making decisions about knee replacement. Soc Sci Med 2024; 355:117112. [PMID: 39029443 DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117112] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2024] [Revised: 07/03/2024] [Accepted: 07/06/2024] [Indexed: 07/21/2024]
Abstract
Risk communication is a key legal and ethical component of shared decision-making. Decisions about total knee replacement, a common surgery, must contend with the fact that a minority of cases result in unintended outcomes, some of which have devastating effects. To understand how risks are communicated during decision-making, we audio-recorded and analysed 62 consultations between surgeons and patients. Various communication methods were evident, including listing risks without elaboration, discussing them in a conversational manner, abrogating discussion of risk, or using decision-tools. Discussion of risks was often brief in nature, and risk communication was sometimes curtailed or deferred by both patients and surgeons. Risks could also be observed to play a part in reinforcing policy norms of the doctor-patient relationship that highlighted patient responsibility. Nevertheless, patients and surgeons in the observed consultations appeared more interested in developing trusting relationships than in discussing risks. Because patients had sometimes experienced considerable deterioration in their knee function before their consultation, were in pain and struggled with mobility, the realities of clinical practice clashed with the policy norms of choice and patient responsibility. Rather, decisions could appear coerced by the disease process rather than being clear-cut examples of self-determination. While policy norms putatively use risk disclosure to frame communication between patients and clinicians as a transaction between customer and technician, the lack of conformity to these norms in the consultations may indicate resistance to this framing. A greater emphasis on determining positive roles for trust and care would help policy to present a nuanced understanding of decision-making. Risk communication could be seen as a factor in the formation of trusting relationships, improving its role in decision-making processes while recognising its inherent tensions with practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Wendy Bertram
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK; NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and University of Bristol, UK
| | | | - Richard Huxtable
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK; NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and University of Bristol, UK
| | - Nicholas Howells
- North Bristol NHS Trust, Southmead Hospital Southmead Road, Westbury-On-Trym, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK
| | - Zoe Chivers
- Versus Arthritis, Copeman House, Chesterfield, S41 7TD, UK
| | - Emma Johnson
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK
| | - Vikki Wylde
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK; NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and University of Bristol, UK
| | - Leah Jones
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK
| | - Tony Timlin
- North Bristol NHS Trust, Southmead Hospital Southmead Road, Westbury-On-Trym, Bristol, BS10 5NB, UK
| | - Rachael Gooberman-Hill
- Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, UK; NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and University of Bristol, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Pearce A, Mitchell LA, Best S, Young MA, Terrill B. Publics' knowledge of, attitude to and motivation towards health-related genomics: a scoping review. Eur J Hum Genet 2024; 32:747-758. [PMID: 38316954 PMCID: PMC11220043 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-024-01547-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2023] [Revised: 11/12/2023] [Accepted: 01/18/2024] [Indexed: 02/07/2024] Open
Abstract
The use of genomic data in research and genomic information in clinical care is increasing as technologies advance and sequencing costs decrease. Using Rogers' Diffusion of Innovation (DOI) theory as a framework we reviewed recent literature examining publics' current knowledge of, attitude to, and motivation towards health-related genomics in clinical and research settings. The population of interest was described as 'publics' to denote the heterogeneity of 'the public'. Eligible studies were published in English between 2016-2022. We retrieved 1657 records, with 278 full-text reviewed against the eligibility criteria and concept definitions. In total, 99 articles were included in the review and descriptive numerical summaries were collated. Knowledge literature was categorized using deductive thematic analysis. For attitude and motivation, literature was coded using an analytic framework developed by the authors. There was wide variability in concept definition and measurement across studies. Overall, there was general positivity about genomics, with high awareness but little familiarity or factual knowledge. Publics had high expectations of genomics and perceived that it could provide them with information for their future. Only a few key attitudes were found to be important as motivators or barriers for participation in genomics; these were related to personal and clinical utility of the information. Context was often missing from studies, decreasing the utility of findings for implementation or public engagement. Future research would benefit by using theory-driven approaches to assess relevant publics' knowledge and attitudes of specific contexts or applications to support genomic implementation and informed decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angela Pearce
- Clinical Translation & Engagement, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
- School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
| | - Lucas A Mitchell
- Clinical Translation & Engagement, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia
- School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Stephanie Best
- Department of Health Services Research, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Mary-Anne Young
- Clinical Translation & Engagement, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia
- School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Bronwyn Terrill
- Clinical Translation & Engagement, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia
- School of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of NSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia
- Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Nolan JJ, Forrest J, Ormondroyd E. Additional findings from the 100,000 Genomes Project: A qualitative study of recipient perspectives. Genet Med 2024; 26:101103. [PMID: 38411041 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2024.101103] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2023] [Revised: 02/19/2024] [Accepted: 02/21/2024] [Indexed: 02/28/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Participants in the 100,000 Genomes Project, a clinical/research initiative delivered through the UK National Health Service, were offered screening for "additional findings" (AFs): pathogenic/likely pathogenic secondary findings in genes associated with familial hypercholesterolemia or a cancer predisposition syndrome. Understanding the psychological and behavioral responses to secondary findings can inform the clinical utility of a search and disclose policy. METHODS Thirty-two adult AF recipients took part in semi-structured interviews analyzed using deductive and inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS Five themes were constructed: cognitive responses to an AF, emotional and psychological responses, personal control, perceived risk of AF-associated disease, and family implications. Many participants had misunderstood or incompletely remembered consent for AFs, and most were surprised or shocked to receive an AF. Although many ultimately appreciated knowing about the risk conferred, some struggled to make sense of their disease risk, which complicated decision making about risk management, particularly for women with a BRCA AF. Recipients sought control through seeking clinical evaluation and information, and informing relatives. Difficulties with conceptualizing risk and lack of AF-associated disease family history meant that some hesitated to inform relatives. CONCLUSION Genome sequencing programs offering secondary findings require attention to consent processes. Post-disclosure care should aim to promote recipients' perceived personal control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joshua J Nolan
- Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Jamie Forrest
- Oxford Centre for Genomic Medicine, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom; University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom
| | - Elizabeth Ormondroyd
- Radcliffe Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom; NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, United Kingdom.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Peter M, Hammond J, Sanderson SC, Gurasashvili J, Hunter A, Searle B, Patch C, Chitty LS, Hill M, Lewis C. Knowledge, attitudes and decision regret: a longitudinal survey study of participants offered genome sequencing in the 100,000 Genomes Project. Eur J Hum Genet 2023; 31:1407-1413. [PMID: 37789083 PMCID: PMC10689827 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-023-01470-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2023] [Revised: 08/21/2023] [Accepted: 09/20/2023] [Indexed: 10/05/2023] Open
Abstract
We used cross-sectional surveys to compare the knowledge, attitudes, and decision regret of participants who had consented for genome sequencing (GS) for rare disease diagnosis in the 100,000 Genomes Project (100kGP) across two timepoints (at the time of consenting for GS (T1) and 12-18 months later (T2)). At T1, participants (n = 504) completed a survey that included measures of general knowledge of GS ("Knowledge of Genome Sequencing" (KOGS)), specific knowledge of GS and attitudes towards GS ("General attitudes" and "Specific attitudes"). At T2, participants (n = 296) completed these same assessments (apart from the specific knowledge scale) together with an assessment of decision regret towards GS ("Decisional Regret Scale"). At 12-18 months after consenting for GS, participants' basic knowledge of GS had remained stable. General knowledge of GS varied across topics; concepts underlying more general information about genetics were better understood than the technical details of genomic testing. Attitudes towards GS at T2 were generally positive, and feelings towards GS (both positive and negative) remained unchanged. However, those who were more positive about the test at the outset had greater specific knowledge (as opposed to general knowledge) of GS. Finally, although the majority of participants indicated feeling little regret towards undergoing GS, those with low positive attitude and high negative attitude about GS at T1 reported greater decision regret at T2. Careful assessment of patient knowledge about and attitudes towards GS at the time of offering testing is crucial for supporting informed decision making and mitigating later regret.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle Peter
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Genetics and Genomic Medicine, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| | - Jennifer Hammond
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Genetics and Genomic Medicine, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| | - Saskia C Sanderson
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Jana Gurasashvili
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Genetics and Genomic Medicine, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| | | | - Beverly Searle
- Unique - Rare Chromosome Disorder Support Group, Oxted, UK
| | - Christine Patch
- Engagement and Society, Wellcome Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, CB10 1RQ, UK
| | - Lyn S Chitty
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Genetics and Genomic Medicine, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| | - Melissa Hill
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Genetics and Genomic Medicine, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| | - Celine Lewis
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
- Population, Policy and Practice Department, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Farsides B, Lucassen AM. Ethical preparedness and developments in genomic healthcare. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2023:jme-2022-108528. [PMID: 37268409 DOI: 10.1136/jme-2022-108528] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/11/2022] [Accepted: 05/17/2023] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
Considerations of the notion of preparedness have come to the fore in the recent pandemic, highlighting a need to be better prepared to deal with sudden, unexpected and unwanted events. However, the concept of preparedness is also important in relation to planned for and desired interventions resulting from healthcare innovations. We describe ethical preparedness as a necessary component for the successful delivery of novel healthcare innovations, and use recent advances in genomic healthcare as an example. We suggest that practitioners and organisations charged with delivering innovative and ambitious healthcare programmes can only succeed if they are able to exhibit the attribute of ethical preparedness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bobbie Farsides
- Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
| | - Anneke M Lucassen
- Clinical Ethics, Law and Society (CELS), Centre for Personalised Medicine, Wellcome Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Mayeur C, Mertes H, Van Hoof W. Do genomic passports leave us more vulnerable or less vulnerable? Perspectives from an online citizen engagement. HUMANITIES & SOCIAL SCIENCES COMMUNICATIONS 2023; 10:83. [PMID: 36909259 PMCID: PMC9985078 DOI: 10.1057/s41599-023-01580-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2022] [Accepted: 02/21/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
Since genomics is becoming commonplace in healthcare for the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention, the prospect of generating a genomic passport for all citizens is gaining traction. While this would have many advantages, it raises ethical issues requiring societal debate alongside academic reflection. Hence, Sciensano-the Belgian scientific Institute of Public Health-organised an online citizen engagement on genomic information usage, including a question on a genomic passport for all. The inductive thematic analysis of participants' contributions highlighted vulnerability as a fundamental concern, while this has not received sufficient attention so far in genomics. Participants expressed their vulnerability in two ways. First, the genomic passport would inform them about their ontological vulnerability. By revealing their constitutional weaknesses (predisposition to diseases), it reminds them that everyone is unavoidably and perennially at risk of being harmed. Second, the misuse of the genomic passport can add situational vulnerabilities (e.g., discrimination causing psychological and economic harm). Moreover, the fundamental uncertainty in genomics-how will such sensitive information be used, and how will the science evolve?-exacerbates these vulnerabilities. This article ends with recommendations to alleviate these vulnerabilities in genomics now and in the future in which the genomic passport may become a reality.
Collapse
|
7
|
Ulph F, Bennett R. Psychological and Ethical Challenges of Introducing Whole Genome Sequencing into Routine Newborn Screening: Lessons Learned from Existing Newborn Screening. New Bioeth 2023; 29:52-74. [PMID: 36181705 DOI: 10.1080/20502877.2022.2124582] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/06/2023]
Abstract
As a psychologist and an ethicist, we have explored empirically newborn screening consent and communication processes. In this paper we consider the impact on families if newborn screening uses whole genome sequencing. We frame this within the World Health Organization's definition of health and contend that proposals to use whole genome sequencing in newborn screening take into account the ethical, practical and psychological impact of such screening. We argue that the important psychological processes occurring in the neonatal phase necessitate a clear justification that providing risk information at this stage provides a health benefit. We illustrate how research on current newborn screening can inform whole genome sequencing debates, whilst highlighting important gaps. Obtaining explicit, voluntary, and sufficiently informed consent for newborn screening is challenging, however we stress that such consent is ethically and legally appropriate and psychologically and practically important. We conclude by outling how this might be done.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fiona Ulph
- Division of Psychology & Mental Health, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Rebecca Bennett
- Centre for Social Ethics and Policy, Department of Law, School of Social Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Horn R, Merchant J. Managing expectations, rights, and duties in large-scale genomics initiatives: a European comparison. Eur J Hum Genet 2023; 31:142-147. [PMID: 36471117 PMCID: PMC9734861 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-022-01247-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2022] [Revised: 11/09/2022] [Accepted: 11/15/2022] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Ruth Horn
- The Ethox Centre and Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
- Ethics of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany.
| | - Jennifer Merchant
- CNRS Law & Humanities/CERSA UMR-7109, University Paris-Panthéon-Assas, Paris, France
- Institut Universitaire de France, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Gereis J, Hetherington K, Ha L, Robertson EG, Ziegler DS, Barlow-Stewart K, Tucker KM, Marron JM, Wakefield CE. Parents' understanding of genome and exome sequencing for pediatric health conditions: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet 2022; 30:1216-1225. [PMID: 35999452 PMCID: PMC9626631 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-022-01170-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2022] [Revised: 07/13/2022] [Accepted: 07/26/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Genome and exome sequencing (GS/ES) are increasingly being used in pediatric contexts. We summarize evidence regarding the actual and perceived understanding of GS/ES of parents of a child offered testing for diagnosis and/or management of a symptomatic health condition. We searched four databases (2008-2021) and identified 1264 unique articles, of which 16 met inclusion criteria. We synthesized data from qualitative and quantitative studies and organized results using Ayuso et al. (2013)'s framework of key elements of information for informed consent to GS/ES. Many of the parents represented had prior experience with genetic testing and accessed a form of genetic counseling. Parents' understanding was varied across the domains evaluated. Parents demonstrated understanding of the various potential direct clinical benefits to their child undergoing GS/ES, including in relation to other genetic tests. We found parents had mixed understanding of the nature of potential secondary findings, and of issues related to data privacy, confidentiality, and usage of sequencing results beyond their child's clinical care. Genetic counseling consultations improved understanding. Our synthesis indicates that ES/GS can be challenging for families to understand and underscores the importance of equipping healthcare professionals to explore parents' understanding of ES/GS and the implications of testing for their child.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica Gereis
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia ,grid.414009.80000 0001 1282 788XBehavioural Sciences Unit, Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children’s Hospital, Sydney, NSW Australia
| | - Kate Hetherington
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia ,grid.414009.80000 0001 1282 788XBehavioural Sciences Unit, Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children’s Hospital, Sydney, NSW Australia
| | - Lauren Ha
- grid.414009.80000 0001 1282 788XBehavioural Sciences Unit, Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children’s Hospital, Sydney, NSW Australia ,grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432School of Health Sciences, UNSW Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia
| | - Eden G. Robertson
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia
| | - David S. Ziegler
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia ,grid.414009.80000 0001 1282 788XKids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children’s Hospital, Sydney, NSW Australia ,grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432Children’s Cancer Institute, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia
| | - Kristine Barlow-Stewart
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia ,grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432Children’s Cancer Institute, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia ,grid.1013.30000 0004 1936 834XNorthern Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia
| | - Katherine M. Tucker
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432Prince of Wales Clinical School, UNSW Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia
| | - Jonathan M. Marron
- grid.65499.370000 0001 2106 9910Department of Pediatric Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA USA ,grid.2515.30000 0004 0378 8438Division of Hematology/Oncology, Boston Children’s Hospital, Boston, MA USA ,grid.38142.3c000000041936754XCenter for Bioethics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA USA
| | - Claire E. Wakefield
- grid.1005.40000 0004 4902 0432School of Clinical Medicine, UNSW Medicine & Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia ,grid.414009.80000 0001 1282 788XBehavioural Sciences Unit, Kids Cancer Centre, Sydney Children’s Hospital, Sydney, NSW Australia
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Genomic health data generation in the UK: a 360 view. Eur J Hum Genet 2022; 30:782-789. [PMID: 34663916 PMCID: PMC8523282 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-021-00976-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2021] [Revised: 08/25/2021] [Accepted: 09/27/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
In the UK, genomic health data is being generated in three major contexts: the healthcare system (based on clinical indication), in large scale research programmes, and for purchasers of direct-to-consumer genetic tests. The recently delivered hybrid clinical/research programme, 100,000 Genomes Project set the scene for a new Genomic Medicine Service, through which the National Health Service aims to deliver consistent and equitable care informed by genomics, while providing data to inform academic and industry research and development. In parallel, a large scale research study, Our Future Health, has UK Government and Industry investment and aims to recruit 5 million volunteers to support research intended to improve early detection, risk stratification, and early intervention for chronic diseases. To explore how current models of genomic health data generation intersect, and to understand clinical, ethical, legal, policy and social issues arising from this intersection, we conducted a series of five multidisciplinary panel discussions attended by 28 invited stakeholders. Meetings were recorded and transcribed. We present a summary of issues identified: genomic test attributes; reasons for generating genomic health data; individuals' motivation to seek genomic data; health service impacts; role of genetic counseling; equity; data uses and security; consent; governance and regulation. We conclude with some suggestions for policy consideration.
Collapse
|
11
|
Pichini A, Ahmed A, Patch C, Bick D, Leblond M, Kasperaviciute D, Deen D, Wilde S, Garcia Noriega S, Matoko C, Tuff-Lacey A, Wigley C, Scott RH. Developing a National Newborn Genomes Program: An Approach Driven by Ethics, Engagement and Co-design. Front Genet 2022; 13:866168. [PMID: 35711926 PMCID: PMC9195613 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.866168] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2022] [Accepted: 04/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
The transformative potential of whole genome sequencing (WGS) as a diagnostic tool in healthcare has been demonstrated by initiatives including the 100,000 Genomes Project and is now offered to certain patients in the National Health Service (NHS) in England. Building on these foundations, the utility of WGS in the newborn period can now be explored. Genomics England is working in partnership with NHS England and NHS Improvement and other healthcare, patient and public interest groups to design a research program embedded in the NHS to explore the potential challenges and implications of offering WGS in all newborns. The program will aim to: 1) evaluate the feasibility, utility and impact on the NHS of screening for childhood-onset rare actionable genetic conditions; 2) understand how, with consent, genomic and healthcare data could be used to enable research to develop new diagnostics and treatments; and 3) explore the implications of storing an individual's genome for use over their lifetime. Recognizing the important practical, scientific and ethical questions that we must explore in dialogue with the public and experts, we are taking a collaborative, evidence-based and ethically deliberate approach to designing the program. An iterative co-design process including a nationwide public dialogue has identified emergent themes and ethical considerations which are the focus of the program's design. These themes will be further developed through continued engagement with healthcare professionals, researchers, ethics experts, patient groups and the public, with an ongoing commitment to embedding ongoing ethics research and co-design into the delivery of the program.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Christine Patch
- Genomics England, London, United Kingdom.,Engagement and Society, Wellcome Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, United Kingdom
| | - David Bick
- Genomics England, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | - Dasha Deen
- Genomics England, London, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Gorman R, Farsides B. Writing the worlds of genomic medicine: experiences of using participatory-writing to understand life with rare conditions. MEDICAL HUMANITIES 2022; 48:e4. [PMID: 35418508 PMCID: PMC9185826 DOI: 10.1136/medhum-2021-012346] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/09/2022] [Indexed: 05/08/2023]
Abstract
The diagnostic and treatment possibilities made possible by the development and subsequent mainstreaming of clinical genomics services have the potential to profoundly change the experiences of families affected by rare genetic conditions. Understanding the potentials of genomic medicine requires that we consider the perspectives of those who engage with such services; there are substantial social implications involved. There are increasing calls to think more creatively, and draw on more participatory approaches, in evoking rich accounts of lived experience. In this article, we discuss our rationale for, and experiences of, using 'participatory-writing' to understand the diverse, variable and multilayered everyday lives of families and how these correspond with the emerging, rapidly changing and complex field of genomic medicine. Participatory-writing has many benefits as a method for social inquiry. Writing can be expressive and self-revelatory, providing insight into personal and sensitive topics. Writing together produces new conversations and relationships. Pieces written by participants have the potential to affect readers, evoking and enlivening research and prompting professional change. Working with a writing tutor, we organised a participatory-writing programme for families touched by genetic conditions. This involved a series of workshops with an emphasis on building confidence in expressing lived experience through experimenting with different writing techniques. Afterwards we arranged reflective interviews with participants. We drew on dialogical narrative analysis to engage with participants' written pieces, and highlight what everyday life is like for the people who live with, and care for, those with genetic conditions. The stories produced through our writing-groups unfold the implications of new genomic technologies, illuminating how genomics acts to (and likewise, fails to) reconfigure aspects of people's lives outside of the clinic, while simultaneously existing as a sociotechnical frame that can eclipse the wider contexts, challenges and liveliness of life with rare genetic conditions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard Gorman
- Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, Brighton and Hove, UK
| | - Bobbie Farsides
- Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Brighton, Brighton and Hove, UK
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Pichini A, Bishop M. A nationally agreed cross-professional competency framework to facilitate genomic testing. Genet Med 2022; 24:1743-1752. [PMID: 35583551 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2022.04.023] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2021] [Revised: 04/19/2022] [Accepted: 04/22/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The study aimed to develop a nationally agreed, cross-professional competency framework outlining the knowledge, skills, and behaviors required to facilitate genomic tests. METHODS Using principles of the nominal group technique, a consensus meeting with 25 experts mapped themes to an initial framework and voted on areas of inconsistency. A revised framework was open for consultation with health care professionals and patient communities before being published. An evaluation, using an online survey, was conducted to explore early use and factors to facilitate adoption of the framework. RESULTS The framework identified 8 competencies required to facilitate genomic tests. The evaluation (239 survey responses from health care professionals) indicated that the framework addresses a timely need among users and identified ways to improve awareness and accessibility for different health care professional groups. CONCLUSION This framework can be used as a guide for best practice by health care professionals who request genomic tests. It can also provide a foundation to identify learning needs and structure training such that conversations about genomic testing can be delivered in a consistent manner across specialties. These competencies can also be used as a reference to evaluate how consent is facilitated in different specialty areas to enhance the responsible delivery of genomic medicine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Pichini
- Genomics Education Programme, Health Education England, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Bristol Clinical Genetics Service, Department of Clinical Genetics, St Michael's Hospital, Bristol, United Kingdom; Genomics England, London, United Kingdom.
| | - Michelle Bishop
- Genomics Education Programme, Health Education England, Birmingham, United Kingdom; Wellcome Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Participant experiences of genome sequencing for rare diseases in the 100,000 Genomes Project: a mixed methods study. Eur J Hum Genet 2022; 30:604-610. [PMID: 35264738 PMCID: PMC9091267 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-022-01065-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2021] [Revised: 01/17/2022] [Accepted: 02/01/2022] [Indexed: 01/30/2023] Open
Abstract
In this mixed methods study, a survey and in-depth interviews were used to explore whether decision regret and the psychological impact of receiving genome sequencing (GS) results differed between parents and patients, and between those who received a genetic diagnosis and those who did not. Participants (n = 77) completed a survey that included the Decisional Regret Scale (DRS) and an adaptation of the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) at least 12 months after consenting for GS for rare disease diagnosis in the 100,000 Genomes Project. Survey participants were invited to take part in an interview and 39 agreed; 12 with a diagnosis, 5 with variants of uncertain significance, and 19 with no pathogenic findings identified. Both survey and interview findings indicated that decision regret was low. DRS scores revealed no differences in levels of regret between parents and patients, or between those with a diagnosis and those without. Though MICRA scores indicated minimal evidence of negative psychological impacts of receiving GS results, subscale analysis revealed greater distress and uncertainty for parents compared to patients. Receiving a diagnosis was found not to influence MICRA scores, supporting interview findings of both positive and negative emotional and psychological impacts irrespective of a genetic diagnosis. Our findings have implications for policy and practice as GS is integrated into the UK and worldwide; notably, that expectation-setting is critical when offering GS, and that post-test counselling is important regardless of the GS result received, with parents perhaps needing additional emotional support.
Collapse
|
15
|
Lewis C, Buchanan J, Clarke A, Clement E, Friedrich B, Hastings-Ward J, Hill M, Horn R, Lucassen AM, Patch C, Pickard A, Roberts L, Sanderson SC, Wynn SL, Vindrola-Padros C, Lakhanpaul M. Mixed-methods evaluation of the NHS Genomic Medicine Service for paediatric rare diseases: study protocol. NIHR OPEN RESEARCH 2021; 1:23. [PMID: 35098132 PMCID: PMC7612282 DOI: 10.3310/nihropenres.13236.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
Background A new nationally commissioned NHS England Genomic Medicine Service (GMS) was recently established to deliver genomic testing with equity of access for patients affected by rare diseases and cancer. The overarching aim of this research is to evaluate the implementation of the GMS during its early years, identify barriers and enablers to successful implementation, and provide recommendations for practice. The focus will be on the use of genomic testing for paediatric rare diseases. Methods This will be a four-year mixed-methods research programme using clinic observations, interviews and surveys. Study 1 consists of qualitative interviews with designers/implementers of the GMS in Year 1 of the research programme, along with documentary analysis to understand the intended outcomes for the Service. These will be revisited in Year 4 to compare intended outcomes with what happened in practice, and to identify barriers and facilitators that were encountered along the way. Study 2 consists of clinic observations (pre-test counselling and results disclosure) to examine the interaction between health professionals and parents, along with follow-up interviews with both after each observation. Study 3 consists of a longitudinal survey with parents at two timepoints (time of testing and 12 months post-results) along with follow-up interviews, to examine parent-reported experiences and outcomes. Study 4 consists of qualitative interviews and a cross-sectional survey with medical specialists to identify preparedness, facilitators and challenges to mainstreaming genomic testing. The use of theory-based and pre-specified constructs will help generalise the findings and enable integration across the various sub-studies. Dissemination We will disseminate our results to policymakers as findings emerge, so any suggested changes to service provision can be considered in a timely manner. A workshop with key stakeholders will be held in Year 4 to develop and agree a set of recommendations for practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Celine Lewis
- Population, Policy and Practice, UCL GOS Institute of Child Health, London, UK
- London North Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - James Buchanan
- Health Economics Research Centre, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford,, Oxford, UK
- NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, UK
| | - Angus Clarke
- Division of Cancer and Genetics, Cardiff University School of Medicine, Cardiff, UK
| | - Emma Clement
- Clinical Genetics and Genomic Medicine, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Bettina Friedrich
- Population, Policy and Practice, UCL GOS Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| | | | - Melissa Hill
- London North Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Genetics and Genomic Medicine, UCL GOS Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| | - Ruth Horn
- The Ethox Centre and the Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Anneke M. Lucassen
- Clinical Ethics and Law, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Chris Patch
- Genomics England, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Counselling, Society and Ethics Research, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge, UK
| | | | | | | | - Sarah L. Wynn
- Unique – the Rare Chromosome Disorder Support Group, Oxted, UK
| | - Cecilia Vindrola-Padros
- Department of Targeted Intervention and Rapid Research Evaluation and Appraisal Lab (RREAL),, University College London, London, UK
| | - Monica Lakhanpaul
- Population, Policy and Practice, UCL GOS Institute of Child Health, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Sanderson SC, Lewis C, Hill M, Peter M, McEntagart M, Gale D, Morris H, Moosajee M, Searle B, Hunter A, Patch C, Chitty LS. Decision-making, attitudes, and understanding among patients and relatives invited to undergo genome sequencing in the 100,000 Genomes Project: A multisite survey study. Genet Med 2021; 24:61-74. [PMID: 34906473 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2021.08.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2019] [Revised: 07/26/2021] [Accepted: 08/16/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to assess decisions, attitudes, and understanding of participants (patients, parents, relatives) having genome sequencing for rare disease diagnosis. METHODS This study involved a cross-sectional observational survey with participants in the 100,000 Genomes Project. RESULTS Survey response rate was 51% (504/978). Most participants self-reported that they had decided to undergo genome sequencing (94%) and that this was an informed decision (84%) with low decisional conflict (95%). Most self-reported that they had chosen to receive additional findings (88%) and that this was an informed decision (89%) with low decisional conflict (95%). Participants were motivated more by the desire to help others via research than by the belief it would help them obtain a diagnosis (Z = 14.23, P = 5.75 × 10-46), although both motivations were high. Concerns were relatively few but, where expressed, were more about the potential psychological impact of results than data sharing/access (Z = 9.61, P = 7.65 × 10-22). Concerns were higher among male, Asian or Asian British, and more religious participants. General and context-specific understanding of genome sequencing were both moderately high (means 5.2/9.0 and 22.5/28.0, respectively). CONCLUSION These findings are useful to inform consent guidelines and clinical implementation of genome sequencing.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Saskia C Sanderson
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Our Future Health, London, United Kingdom
| | - Celine Lewis
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Population, Policy and Practice Research and Teaching Department, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Melissa Hill
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Genetics and Genomic Medicine, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Michelle Peter
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Genetics and Genomic Medicine, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Meriel McEntagart
- Medical Genetics, St George's University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
| | - Daniel Gale
- Department of Renal Medicine, University College London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Huw Morris
- Department of Clinical and Movement Neurosciences, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Neurology, Royal Free Hospital, London, United Kingdom
| | - Mariya Moosajee
- UCL Institute of Ophthalmology, University College London, London, United Kingdom; Moorfields Eye Hospital, London, United Kingdom; Department of Ophthalmology, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
| | - Beverly Searle
- Unique - Rare Chromosome Disorder Support Group, Oxted, United Kingdom
| | - Amy Hunter
- Genetic Alliance UK, London, United Kingdom
| | - Christine Patch
- Genomics England, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom; Society and Ethics Research, Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Hinxton, United Kingdom
| | - Lyn S Chitty
- NHS North Thames Genomic Laboratory Hub, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; Genetics and Genomic Medicine, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Mayeur C, van Hoof W. Citizens' conceptions of the genome: Related values and practical implications in a citizen forum on the use of genomic information. Health Expect 2021; 24:468-477. [PMID: 33453142 PMCID: PMC8077069 DOI: 10.1111/hex.13187] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2020] [Revised: 12/07/2020] [Accepted: 12/09/2020] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The development of large data sets, including genomic data, coupled with rapid advances in personalized medicine where citizens increasingly face complex choices about the use of their genomic information implies that citizens are essential stakeholders in genomics. They should be engaged in the ethical, legal and societal issues to produce a framework that fosters trust and allows them to guide the technology based on their values. OBJECTIVE This article highlights that citizens' conceptions of the human genome inform about and make sense of their main values regarding the use of genomic information, which is critical for policymakers, experts and stakeholders to understand to maintain the public support in genomics. METHOD Through an inductive thematic approach, we reanalysed data collected for the Belgian citizen forum, which aimed to produce recommendations for the Ministry of Public Health and other stakeholders. RESULTS Citizens expressed four conceptions of the genome that determined which uses of genomic information they supported: the most intimate part of individuals; 'I am more than my genome'; the individual's property vs the common good; and uncertainty and fear. CONCLUSION Diversity in their conceptions reveals remaining conflicts of values among citizens, mainly regarding a conception of the genome as an individual property or a common good. However, despite differing conceptions, shared values emerged such as solidarity, privacy, no genetic discrimination and the right to an open future, where individual and common interests coexist. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION The panel of the citizen forum consisted of 32 citizens.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chloé Mayeur
- Department of Public Health and Monitoring, Cancer Center, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Wannes van Hoof
- Department of Public Health and Monitoring, Cancer Center, Sciensano, Brussels, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Parents' motivations, concerns and understanding of genome sequencing: a qualitative interview study. Eur J Hum Genet 2020; 28:874-884. [PMID: 32001839 PMCID: PMC7316711 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-020-0575-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2019] [Revised: 11/05/2019] [Accepted: 01/14/2020] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
The 100,000 Genomes Project is a hybrid clinical and research project in which patients and parents are offered genome sequencing for cancer and rare and inherited disease diagnosis; all participants receive their main findings and contribute their data for research, and are offered optional secondary findings. Our aim was to explore participating parents' attitudes towards and understanding of genome sequencing in this hybrid context. We conducted in-depth telephone interviews with 20 parents of children with rare diseases participating in the 100,000 Genomes Project. Parents were positive about contributing to research, although some had needed reassurance about data protections. Although most felt positive about secondary findings, some could not recall or misunderstood key aspects. Some were also concerned about potential emotional impact of results and a few raised concerns about life insurance implications, and the impact of future legal changes. Participants were generally positive about consent appointments, but several raised concerns about 'information overload' because of deciding about secondary findings at the same time as about the main diagnostic genome sequencing and data contribution. Additional information resources, particularly online tools, were highlighted as potentially useful ways of supporting the consent process. We conclude that parents offered genome sequencing as part of a national hybrid clinical and research project report many positive attitudes and experiences, but also concerns and misunderstandings. Further research is needed on how best to support informed consent, particularly about secondary findings. Additional resources such as online tools might usefully support future genome sequencing consent processes.
Collapse
|
19
|
Exploring broad consent in the context of the 100,000 Genomes Project: a mixed methods study. Eur J Hum Genet 2020; 28:732-741. [PMID: 31919452 DOI: 10.1038/s41431-019-0570-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2019] [Revised: 12/06/2019] [Accepted: 12/17/2019] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Abstract
The 100,000 Genomes Project (100kGP)-a hybrid clinical-research initiative-was set up to analyse whole-genome sequences (WGS) from patients living with a rare disease or cancer. The project positioned participant consent as being of central importance, but consent in the context of genomic testing raises challenging issues. In this mixed method study, we surveyed 1337 100kGP participants regarding their experiences of taking part in the project and conducted in-depth interviews with 24 survey respondents to explore these findings further. Survey responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and interview data were analysed thematically. The consent approach of the 100kGP resulted in a proportion of our study's participants not understanding the complexities of the project and what types of results they might receive; for example, 20% of participants who we surveyed from the cancer arm did not recall what decisions they had made regarding additional findings. It is not surprising that a project such as this, with such diverse aims and participant groups, would throw up at least some challenges. However, participants reported being satisfied with their experience of the project to date. Our study highlights that in the context of consent for more complex endeavours, such as the 100kGP, it is important to assess (and document) an agreement to take part, but complicated decisions about what and when to communicate may need revisiting over time in response to changing contexts. We discuss the implications of our findings with reference to participants of the 100kGP and the newly formed NHS Genomic Medicine Service.
Collapse
|