Pharmacists as facilitators of pharmacogenomic guidance for antidepressant drug selection and dosing

Implementing pharmacogenomic testing in Australian general practice: an exploratory qualitative study

Aim: To explore general practitioners' (GPs) views on implementing pharmacogenomic testing in Australian general practice.Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nine GPs in Australia, recruited from primary care networks. Interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. Themes were mapped onto the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains.Results: Barriers to implementation included lack of knowledge, education, standardized pharmacogenomic reports and national clinical guidelines and financial inaccessibility. Facilitators included positive exposure to pharmacogenomics, peer influences, interdisciplinary collaboration and proven clinical utility. Current uptake was minimal; however, GPs shared positive perceptions of clinical use.Conclusion: Recommendations for successful implementation include building and disseminating clinical evidence, developing national guidelines and standardized reports, incorporation into formal education and increasing financial accessibility.

A Scoping Review of Attitudes and Experiences with Pharmacogenomic Testing among Patients and the General Public: Implications for Patient Counseling

The use of pharmacogenomic (PGx) tests is increasing, but there are not standard approaches to counseling patients on their implications or results. To inform approaches for patient counseling, we conducted a scoping review of published literature on patient experiences with PGx testing and performed a thematic analysis of qualitative and quantitative reports. A structured scoping review was conducted using Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. The search identified 37 articles (involving n = 6252 participants) published between 2010 and 2021 from a diverse range of populations and using a variety of study methodologies. Thematic analysis identified five themes (reasons for testing/perceived benefit, understanding of results, psychological response, impact of testing on patient/provider relationship, concerns about testing/perceived harm) and 22 subthemes. These results provide valuable context and potential areas of focus during patient counseling on PGx. Many of the knowledge gaps, misunderstandings, and concerns that participants identified could be mitigated by pre- and post-test counseling. More research is needed on patients’ PGx literacy needs, along with the development of a standardized, open-source patient education curriculum and the development of validated PGx literacy assessment tools.