A pilot eConsultation service in Eastern Ontario: bridging clinical genetics and primary care

Mapping inter-professional collaboration in oncogenetics: Results from a scoping review

Inter-professional collaboration could improve timely access and quality of oncogenetic services. Here, we present the results of a scoping review conducted to systematically identify collaborative models available, unpack the nature and extent of collaboration proposed, synthesize evidence on their implementation and evaluation, and identify areas where additional research is needed. A comprehensive search was conducted in four journal indexing databases on June 13th, 2022, and complemented with searches of the grey literature and citations. Screening was conducted by two independent reviewers. Eligible documents included those describing either the theory of change, planning, implementation and/or evaluation of collaborative oncogenetic models. 165 publications were identified, describing 136 unique interventions/studies on oncogenetic models with somewhat overlapping collaborative features. Collaboration appears to be mostly inter-professional in nature, often taking place during risk assessment and pre-testing genetic counseling. Yet, most publications provide very limited information on their collaborative features, and only a few studies have set out to formally evaluate them. Better quality research is needed to comprehensively examine and make conclusions regarding the value of collaboration in this oncogenetics. We propose a definition, logic model, and typology of collaborative oncogenetic models to strengthen future planning, implementation, and evaluation in this field.

Use of eConsult to enhance genetics service delivery in primary care: A multimethod study

PURPOSE

Electronic consultation (eConsult) is a freely-available secure online platform connecting primary care providers (PCPs) to geneticists. Our purpose was to determine whether eConsult is effective in improving genetics service delivery in primary care.

METHODS

PCP questionnaires regarding eConsult's utility, geneticists' tracking form assessments of eConsult type and appropriateness, and geneticists' interviews on implementing eConsult were carried out.

RESULTS

In 2 regions of Ontario, Canada, from January 2019 to June 2020, there were 305 genetics eConsults. For 169 (55%), PCPs indicated receiving good advice for a new course of action; for 110 (36%), referral was now avoided; and for 261 (86%), eConsult was perceived valuable for patient management. Of the 131 geneticist-completed tracking forms, cancer questions were most common (68, 52%). For 63 (48%), geneticists disagreed/strongly disagreed PCPs should know the answer to the referral question. From the interview data, it was observed that geneticists described eConsult positively and suggested how it might improve access and efficiencies if integrated into genetic service delivery. Dealing with eConsults virtually could reduce waitlists, and suggesting appropriate investigations for PCPs could improve efficiencies.

CONCLUSION

eConsult offers a potential solution for receiving timely genetics advice and avoiding unnecessary patient referrals, however, greater effect on access and wait times will need systematic integration into PCP and geneticist practice.

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

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Anticipating the primary care role in genomic medicine: expectations of genetics health professionals

Our purpose was to explore genetics health professionals' (GHPs) expectations of primary care providers' (PCPs) role in genomic medicine now and in the future. Focus groups/interviews were conducted with GHPs in Ontario, Canada. Recordings were transcribed and analysed using qualitative descriptive analysis. Five focus groups (6 clinical geneticists, 24 genetic counselors, 1 nurse, 4 laboratory staff, 3 genetics program administrators) and 3 interviews (nurses) were conducted. GHPs described a key role for PCPs in genomic medicine that could be enhanced if GHPs and PCPs worked together more effectively, making better use of GHPs as a scarce specialist resource, improving PCP knowledge and awareness of genomics, and increasing GHPs' understanding of primary care practice and how to provide PCPs meaningful education and support. Health system change is needed to facilitate the GHP/PCP relationship and improve care. This might include: PCPs ordering more genetic tests independently or with GHP guidance prior to GHP consultations, genomic expertise in primary care clinics or GHPs being accessible through buddy systems or virtually through telemedicine or electronic consultation, and developing educational materials and electronic decision support for PCPs. Our findings highlight need for change in delivering genomic medicine, which requires building the relationship between GHPs and PCPs, and creating new service delivery models to meet future needs.

Telemedicine - chances and challenges for medical genetics in Germany

Telemedicine has been in practical use for many years, mostly within the context of model projects. The current Covid-19 pandemic has accelerated the process of implementing telemedicine in standard care. Numerous regulations, as well as complex reimbursement structures play a role in the application of telemedicine in medical genetics in Germany. Discipline- and technology-specific challenges complicate the integration of technical solutions into the medical genetic practice. In previous studies teleconsultations and virtual consultations in medical genetics have proven their value as indicated by high levels of satisfaction in the users and showing no inferiority to in-person consultation in terms of psychosocial outcome. The next years will bring an increasing demand for genetic counseling that can hardly be met by the limited number of specialists in Germany. In this context telemedicine can help to close these gaps in standard care while strengthening the field by ensuring comprehensive medical genetic care. The German medical genetics community is asked to actively shape the process of implementation by defining areas of genetic counseling that are suitable for telemedicine, by regulating access for physicians and by contributing to the renumeration structures.

Financial constraints on genetic counseling and further risk-management decisions among U.S. women at elevated breast cancer risk

Clinical guidelines recommend that women at high risk of breast cancer should consider various risk-management options, which remain widely underutilized. We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 50 high-risk women to understand how financial constraints affect use of genetic counseling, genetic testing, and further risk-management decisions. Inductive analyses revealed three categories of health-related financial constraint: (a) lack of insurance, (b) underinsurance, and (c) other financial constraints (e.g., medical debt, raising children, managing comorbidities). Various breast cancer risk-management actions were limited by these financial constraints, including genetic counseling, genetic testing, enhanced screening, and prophylactic surgeries. Women's narratives also identified complex relationships between financial constraint and perceptions of healthcare providers and insurance companies, particularly as related to bias, price transparency, and potential genetic discrimination. Results from this study have implications for further research and expansion of genetic counseling services delivery to more economically and racially diverse women.

Electronic consultations (E-consults) and their outcomes: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Electronic consultations (e-consults) are clinician-to-clinician communications that may obviate face-to-face specialist visits. E-consult programs have spread within the US and internationally despite limited data on outcomes. We conducted a systematic review of the recent peer-reviewed literature on the effect of e-consults on access, cost, quality, and patient and clinician experience and identified the gaps in existing research on these outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched 4 databases for empirical studies published between 1/1/2015 and 2/28/2019 that reported on one or more outcomes of interest. Two investigators reviewed titles and abstracts. One investigator abstracted information from each relevant article, and another confirmed the abstraction. We applied the GRADE criteria for the strength of evidence for each outcome.

RESULTS

We found only modest empirical evidence for effectiveness of e-consults on important outcomes. Most studies are observational and within a single health care system, and comprehensive assessments are lacking. For those outcomes that have been reported, findings are generally positive, with mixed results for clinician experience. These findings reassure but also raise concern for publication bias.

CONCLUSION

Despite stakeholder enthusiasm and encouraging results in the literature to date, more rigorous study designs applied across all outcomes are needed. Policy makers need to know what benefits may be expected in what contexts, so they can define appropriate measures of success and determine how to achieve them.

Telegenetics

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of the article is to provide an update on recent evidence for utilization and challenges of implementation of telegenetics in the clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Implementation of telegenetics in health systems is still limited, below 10%, somewhat higher for cancer genetic counseling. Nevertheless, telegenetic services have been shown useful in the COVID pandemic. Key factors for efficient implementation include a patient-centered approach, engaging the major stakeholders, and incorporating telegenetics into existing health policies. Main barriers remain: limitations to billing and reimbursement, licensure, proper equipment and technical issues, engagement of referring providers and patients, coordination of services with local health providers, and lack of decision-making power. Further rigorous studies are needed to investigate the outcomes of telegenetics and to motivate health policies for change.

SUMMARY

Despite continuous evidence of the benefits of telegenetics, its use in health systems remains limited. Further, larger, prospective, randomized, long-term studies are needed to address the outcomes.Enabling factors contributing to the implementation of telegenetics are patient-centeredness, the involvement of major stakeholders, and aligning telegenetics with the existing national health policies.

Optimization of transmural care by implementation of an online expert panel to assess treatment strategy in patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases: A prospective analysis

INTRODUCTION

Centralization of oncological care results in a growing demand for specialized consultations and referrals. Improved telemedicine solutions are needed to facilitate access to specialist care and select patients eligible for referral. The purpose of this quality improvement initiative was to optimize transmural care for patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases through implementation of an online expert panel.

METHODS

A digital communication platform was developed to share medical data, including high-quality diagnostic imaging of patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases. Feasibility of local treatment strategies was assessed by a panel of liver specialists to select patients for referral. After implementation, an observational cohort study was conducted to evaluate quality improvement in transmural care using revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence guidelines.

RESULTS

From September 2016-September 2018, eight hospitals were connected to the platform, covering a population of 3 m. In total, 123 cases were assessed, of which 54 (43.9%) were prevented from needless physical referral. Assessment of treatment strategy by an online expert panel significantly reduced the average lead time during multidisciplinary team meetings from 3.73 min to 2.12 min per patient (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an online expert panel is an innovative, accessible and user-friendly way to provide cancer-specific expertise to regional hospitals. E-consultation of such panels may result in more efficient multidisciplinary team meetings and prevent fragile patients from needless referral. Sustainability of these panels however is subject to structural financial compensation, so a cost-effectiveness analysis is warranted.