Genetic counseling in primary care: longitudinal, psychosocial issues in genetic diagnosis and counseling

Increasing confidence and changing behaviors in primary care providers engaged in genetic counselling

BACKGROUND

Screening and counseling for genetic conditions is an increasingly important part of primary care practice, particularly given the paucity of genetic counselors in the United States. However, primary care physicians (PCPs) often have an inadequate understanding of evidence-based screening; communication approaches that encourage shared decision-making; ethical, legal, and social implication (ELSI) issues related to screening for genetic mutations; and the basics of clinical genetics. This study explored whether an interactive, web-based genetics curriculum directed at PCPs in non-academic primary care settings was superior at changing practice knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors when compared to a traditional educational approach, particularly when discussing common genetic conditions.

METHODS

One hundred twenty one PCPs in California and Pennsylvania physician practices were randomized to either an Intervention Group (IG) or Control Group (CG). IG physicians completed a 6 h interactive web-based curriculum covering communication skills, basics of genetic testing, risk assessment, ELSI issues and practice behaviors. CG physicians were provided with a traditional approach to Continuing Medical Education (CME) (clinical review articles) offering equivalent information.

RESULTS

PCPs in the Intervention Group showed greater increases in knowledge compared to the Control Group. Intervention PCPs were also more satisfied with the educational materials, and more confident in their genetics knowledge and skills compared to those receiving traditional CME materials. Intervention PCPs felt that the web-based curriculum covered medical management, genetics, and ELSI issues significantly better than did the Control Group, and in comparison with traditional curricula. The Intervention Group felt the online tools offered several advantages, and engaged in better shared decision making with standardized patients, however, there was no difference in behavior change between groups with regard to increases in ELSI discussions between PCPs and patients.

CONCLUSION

While our intervention was deemed more enjoyable, demonstrated significant factual learning and retention, and increased shared decision making practices, there were few differences in behavior changes around ELSI discussions. Unfortunately, barriers to implementing behavior change in clinical genetics is not unique to our intervention. Perhaps the missing element is that busy physicians need systems-level support to engage in meaningful discussions around genetics issues. The next step in promoting active engagement between doctors and patients may be to put into place the tools needed for PCPs to easily access the materials they need at the point-of-care to engage in joint discussions around clinical genetics.

Privacy and Equality in Diagnostic Genetic Testing

This study aimed to determine the extent to which the principles of privacy and equality were observed during diagnostic genetic testing according to views held by patients or child patients' parents (n = 106) and by staff (n = 162) from three Finnish university hospitals. The data were collected through a structured questionnaire and analysed using the SAS 8.1 statistical software. In general, the two principles were observed relatively satisfactorily in clinical practice. According to patients/parents, equality in the post-analytic phase and, according to staff, privacy in the pre-analytic phase, involved the greatest ethical problems. The two groups differed in their views concerning pre-analytic privacy. Although there were no major problems regarding the two principles, the differences between the testing phases require further clarification. To enhance privacy protection and equality, professionals need to be given more genetics/ethics training, and patients individual counselling by genetics units staff, giving more consideration to patients' world-view, the purpose of the test and the test result.

Impact of a randomized controlled educational trial to improve physician practice behaviors around screening for inherited breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Many primary care physicians (PCPs) are ill-equipped to provide screening and counseling for inherited breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcomes of an interactive web-based genetics curriculum versus text curriculum for primary care physicians.

DESIGN

Randomized two-group design.

PARTICIPANTS

121 California and Pennsylvania community physicians.

INTERVENTION

Web-based interactive genetics curriculum, evaluated against a control group of physicians who studied genetics review articles. After education, physicians interacted with an announced standardized patient (SP) at risk for inherited breast cancer.

MAIN MEASURES

Transcripts of visit discussions were coded for presence or absence of 69 topics relevant to inherited breast cancer.

KEY RESULTS

Across all physicians, history-taking, discussions of test result implications, and exploration of ethical and legal issues were incomplete. Approximately half of physicians offered a genetic counseling referral (54.6%), and fewer (43.8%) recommended testing. Intervention physicians were more likely than controls to explore genetic counseling benefits (78.3% versus 60.7%, P = 0.048), encourage genetic counseling before testing (38.3% versus 21.3%, P = 0.048), ask about a family history of prostate cancer (25.0% versus 6.6%, P = 0.006), and report that a positive result indicated an increased risk of prostate cancer for male relatives (20.0% versus 1.6%, P = 0.001). Intervention-group physicians were less likely than controls to ask about Ashkenazi heritage (13.3% versus 34.4%, P = 0.01) or to reply that they would get tested when asked, "What would you do?" (33.3% versus 54.1%, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians infrequently performed key counseling behaviors, and this was true regardless of whether they had completed the web-based interactive training or read clinical reviews.

From constraints to opportunities? Provision of psychosocial support in portuguese oncogenetic counseling services

Although available guidelines for familial cancer risk counseling clearly state the need to provide adequate psychosocial assessments and support, this feature of care is only available in part for individuals and families in oncogenetic counseling protocols in Portugal. The purpose of this study was to examine the psychosocial aspects of oncogenetic counseling provided by a sample of Portuguese genetics professionals. We sought to ascertain perceived need for the provision of psychosocial services and ways to enhance the psychosocial focus in service delivery. A qualitative study was designed; semi-structured focus groups and individual interviews were performed with 30 professionals from Portuguese healthcare institutions where oncogenetic counseling is offered. Findings suggest: current practice is aligned with the teaching model, with a mainly information-based focus; use of psychosocial counseling techniques and psychosocial support is limited throughout the genetic counseling timeline; there is a limited workforce of adequately trained psychosocial professionals, who are disadvantaged by structural and organizational constraints. These factors are considered to be serious barriers for psychosocial delivery. Development of multidisciplinary teams working in oncogenetics, and need for further counselling skills and training for genetics healthcare professionals were identified as priorities. Implications for practice and policy are discussed. Portuguese genetic counselors who have recently completed their training, may therefore contribute to enhanced psychosocial services delivery.

Genetic educational needs and the role of genetics in primary care: a focus group study with multiple perspectives

BACKGROUND

Available evidence suggests that improvements in genetics education are needed to prepare primary care providers for the impact of ongoing rapid advances in genomics. Postgraduate (physician training) and master (midwifery training) programmes in primary care and public health are failing to meet these perceived educational needs. The aim of this study was to explore the role of genetics in primary care (i.e. family medicine and midwifery care) and the need for education in this area as perceived by primary care providers, patient advocacy groups and clinical genetics professionals.

METHODS

Forty-four participants took part in three types of focus groups: mono-disciplinary groups of general practitioners and midwives, respectively and multidisciplinary groups composed of a diverse set of experts. The focus group sessions were audio-taped, transcribed verbatim and analysed using content analysis. Recurrent themes were identified.

RESULTS

Four themes emerged regarding the educational needs and the role of genetics in primary care: (1) genetics knowledge, (2) family history, (3) ethical dilemmas and psychosocial effects in relation to genetics and (4) insight into the organisation and role of clinical genetics services. These themes reflect a shift in the role of genetics in primary care with implications for education. Although all focus group participants acknowledged the importance of genetics education, general practitioners felt this need more urgently than midwives and more strongly emphasized their perceived knowledge deficiencies.

CONCLUSION

The responsibilities of primary care providers with regard to genetics require further study. The results of this study will help to develop effective genetics education strategies to improve primary care providers' competencies in this area. More research into the educational priorities in genetics is needed to design courses that are suitable for postgraduate and master programmes for general practitioners and midwives.

Clinical genetics issues encountered by family physicians

PURPOSE

To describe the genetics-related clinical issues encountered by family physicians, and the medical problems they referred to genetics consultants.

METHODS

Questionnaires were mailed to a nationwide, random sample of 498 practicing family physicians, asking how many times in the past year they discussed genetic information about 19 familial or genetic conditions with patients and what proportion of the families with each genetic condition were referred for genetics consultation. Factor analysis was used to group the conditions.

RESULTS

The response rate was 38% (n = 190). Respondents were similar to non-respondents except that more were women. Most family physicians reported discussing the genetics of common cancers, cardiovascular disease, and Alzheimer's disease with two or more patients in the past year. Thirteen percent had referred families for genetics assessment of breast-ovarian cancer but only two made genetics referrals for cardiovascular disease or dementia. 25% to 50% of family physicians had addressed genetic issues in at least one family with hemoglobinopathy, a blood clotting disorder, hemochromatosis, mental illness, vision loss or deafness, chromosome abnormality, infertility or pregnancy loss, congenital anomalies, mental retardation, and neurofibromatosis. Most cases were not referred to geneticists. Of respondents, 23% said that genetics consultation is very difficult to obtain or unavailable and 18% listed ethical and social dilemmas related to pursuing genetic diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Nationwide, family physicians address a variety of genetics issues with patients, most frequently consulting geneticists for perinatal conditions and familial cancers. Access to genetics consultation is more difficult in rural areas. These data may be used in organizing genetics services and in planning professional education programs for primary care clinicians.

Lost in transition: challenges in the expanding field of adult genetics

It is increasingly clear that medical genetics has broad relevance in adult clinical medicine. More adult patients with genetic conditions are being recognized, genetic testing for adult-onset genetic conditions is expanding, and children with genetic conditions are now more likely to survive to adulthood. While the number of patients who could benefit from medical genetic services increases, adult care providers are less well educated about clinical genetics and are not sufficiently prepared to meet the growing needs of this population. Genetics professionals may also be ill-suited for this challenge, since geneticists and genetic counselors have traditionally had greater experience in pediatric and prenatal settings. Communication between primary care physicians who treat adults and the genetics community is currently suboptimal and the identification and subsequent referral of adult patients for genetic services need improvement. Finally, published guidelines that address how to deliver genetic services to adult patients are unavailable for many genetic conditions. In this article we address the challenges of transitioning genetics services from traditional, and largely pediatric-based models to paradigms that can best address the needs of adult patients with genetic conditions. Potential solutions and the practicality of implementation of a team-based approach to adult genetic medicine, including the application of genetic counseling, are also discussed.