1
|
Gasteiger N, Vercell A, Khan N, Dowding D, Davies AC, Davies A. Digital interventions for genomics and genetics education, empowerment, and service engagement: A systematic review. J Community Genet 2023:10.1007/s12687-023-00648-w. [PMID: 37198378 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-023-00648-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2023] [Accepted: 04/24/2023] [Indexed: 05/19/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patient-facing digital technologies may reduce barriers to and alleviate the burden on genetics services. However, no work has synthesised the evidence for patient-facing digital interventions for genomics/genetics education and empowerment, or to facilitate service engagement more broadly. It is also unclear which groups have been engaged by digital interventions. AIM This systematic review explores which existing patient-facing digital technologies have been used for genomics/genetics education and empowerment, or to facilitate service engagement, and for whom and for which purposes the interventions have been developed. METHODS The review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eight databases were searched for literature. Information was extracted into an Excel sheet and analysed in a narrative manner. Quality assessments were conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS Twenty-four studies were included, of which 21 were moderate or high quality. The majority (88%) were conducted in the United States of America or within a clinical setting (79%). More than half (63%) of the interventions were web-based tools, and almost all focussed on educating users (92%). There were promising results regarding educating patients and their families and facilitating engagement with genetics services. Few of the studies focussed on empowering patients or were community-based. CONCLUSION Digital interventions may be used to deliver information about genetics concepts and conditions, and positively impact service engagement. However, there is insufficient evidence related to empowering patients and engaging underserved communities or consanguineous couples. Future work should focus on co-developing content with end users and incorporating interactive features.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Norina Gasteiger
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Amy Vercell
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
- The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Wilmslow Road, Manchester, M20 4BX, UK
| | - Naz Khan
- Genomic Medicine, St. Mary's Hospital, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, M13 9WL, UK
| | - Dawn Dowding
- Division of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Angela C Davies
- Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Alan Davies
- Division of Informatics, Imaging and Data Sciences, School of Health Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sagaser KG, Malinowski J, Westerfield L, Proffitt J, Hicks MA, Toler TL, Blakemore KJ, Stevens BK, Oakes LM. Expanded carrier screening for reproductive risk assessment: An evidence-based practice guideline from the National Society of Genetic Counselors. J Genet Couns 2023. [PMID: 36756860 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1676] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2022] [Revised: 12/20/2022] [Accepted: 12/23/2022] [Indexed: 02/10/2023]
Abstract
Expanded carrier screening (ECS) intends to broadly screen healthy individuals to determine their reproductive chance for autosomal recessive (AR) and X-linked (XL) conditions with infantile or early-childhood onset, which may impact reproductive management (Committee Opinion 690, Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2017, 129, e35). Compared to ethnicity-based screening, which requires accurate knowledge of ancestry for optimal test selection and appropriate risk assessment, ECS panels consist of tens to hundreds of AR and XL conditions that may be individually rare in various ancestries but offer a comprehensive approach to inherited disease screening. As such, the term "equitable carrier screening" may be preferable. This practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for ECS using the GRADE Evidence to Decision framework (Guyatt et al., BMJ, 2008, 336, 995; Guyatt et al., BMJ, 2008, 336, 924). We used evidence from a recent systematic evidence review (Ramdaney et al., Genetics in Medicine, 2022, 20, 374) and compiled data from peer-reviewed literature, scientific meetings, and clinical experience. We defined and prioritized the outcomes of informed consent, change in reproductive plans, yield in identification of at-risk carrier pairs/pregnancies, perceived barriers to ECS, amount of provider time spent, healthcare costs, frequency of severely/profoundly affected offspring, incidental findings, uncertain findings, patient satisfaction, and provider attitudes. Despite the recognized barriers to implementation and change in management strategies, this analysis supported implementation of ECS for these outcomes. Based upon the current level of evidence, we recommend ECS be made available for all individuals considering reproduction and all pregnant reproductive pairs, as ECS presents an ethnicity-based carrier screening alternative which does not rely on race-based medicine. The final decision to pursue carrier screening should be directed by shared decision-making, which takes into account specific features of patients as well as their preferences and values. As a periconceptional reproductive risk assessment tool, ECS is superior compared to ethnicity-based carrier screening in that it both identifies more carriers of AR and XL conditions as well as eliminates a single race-based medical practice. ECS should be offered to all who are currently pregnant, considering pregnancy, or might otherwise biologically contribute to pregnancy. Barriers to the broad implementation of and access to ECS should be identified and addressed so that test performance for carrier screening will not depend on social constructs such as race.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Katelynn G Sagaser
- Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | | | - Lauren Westerfield
- Department of Human and Molecular Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Texas Children's Pavilion for Women at Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, Texas, USA
| | | | | | - Tomi L Toler
- Division of Genetics & Genomic Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Karin J Blakemore
- Division of Maternal Fetal Medicine, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Blair K Stevens
- Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Edwards S, Laing N. Genetic Counselling Needs for Reproductive Genetic Carrier Screening: A Scoping Review. J Pers Med 2022; 12:1699. [PMID: 36294838 PMCID: PMC9605645 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12101699] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2022] [Revised: 10/03/2022] [Accepted: 10/08/2022] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Reproductive genetic carrier screening provides individuals and couples with information regarding their risk of having a child affected by an autosomal recessive or X-linked recessive genetic condition. This information allows them the opportunity to make reproductive decisions in line with their own beliefs and values. Traditionally, carrier screening has been accessed by family members of affected individuals. In recent years, improvements to accessibility and updates to recommendations suggest that all women planning or in early pregnancy should be offered reproductive genetic carrier screening. As uptake moves towards the population scale, how can the genetic counselling needs of such large-scale screening be met? A scoping review of the literature was performed to ascertain what the genetic counselling needs of reproductive genetic carrier screening are, and what future research is needed. Four broad themes were identified in the existing literature: (1) The offer-when and in what context to offer screening; (2) Information-the importance of and what to include in education, and pre- and post-test counselling; (3) Who and how-who the genetic counselling is performed by and how; (4) Personalization-how do we find the balance between standardized and individualized approaches? Based on the existing literature, we present a set of recommendations for consideration in implementing population-scale reproductive genetic carrier screening as well as suggested areas for future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samantha Edwards
- Harry Perkins Institute of Medical Research and Centre for Medical Research, University of Western Australia, QEII Medical Centre, Nedlands, WA 6009, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Hardy MW, Peshkin BN, Rose E, Ladd MK, Binion S, Tynan M, McBride CM, Grinzaid KA, Schwartz MD. Attitudes and interest in incorporating BRCA1/2 cancer susceptibility testing into reproductive carrier screening for Ashkenazi Jewish men and women. J Community Genet 2022; 13:281-292. [PMID: 35486291 PMCID: PMC9051789 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-022-00590-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/29/2022] [Accepted: 04/19/2022] [Indexed: 10/31/2022] Open
Abstract
Pathogenic variants in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) genes are associated with elevated cancer risks in men and women. Due to a founder effect, Ashkenazi Jewish individuals are at higher risk for carrying three specific BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants. There have been recent calls for population screening in this population because many carriers do not have family histories suggestive of hereditary cancer. One approach could be to integrate optional BRCA1/2 testing into routinely offered reproductive carrier screening for recessive and X-linked disorders. However, the differing goals of these types of testing (i.e., personal health risks versus family planning) raise questions about the implications for patient education and informed consent. To this end, we aimed to determine interest, attitudes, and preferences regarding integrating such testing by electronically surveying 331 Ashkenazi Jewish participants in JScreen - a national, not-for-profit, at-home carrier screening program focused on genetic risks in Jewish communities. We found that while 41% of participants had plans to pursue BRCA1/2 testing, 93% would have opted for such testing if offered as an add-on to reproductive carrier screening. This was particularly true of those with higher perceived cancer risk and more positive attitudes toward genetic testing. With respect to preferences about delivery of this service, more than 85% of participants preferred remote (telephone, print, or web-based) genetic education rather than traditional genetic counseling. These results suggest that offering optional BRCA1/2 testing within the context of reproductive carrier screening might provide opportunities for cancer prevention without overburdening scarce genetic counseling resources.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melanie W Hardy
- Department of Human Genetics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Beth N Peshkin
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer, Georgetown University, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 300, Washington, DC, 20007, USA
| | - Esther Rose
- Department of Human Genetics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Mary Kathleen Ladd
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer, Georgetown University, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 300, Washington, DC, 20007, USA
| | - Savannah Binion
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer, Georgetown University, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 300, Washington, DC, 20007, USA
| | - Mara Tynan
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer, Georgetown University, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 300, Washington, DC, 20007, USA
| | - Colleen M McBride
- Department of Behavioral Sciences and Health Education, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Karen A Grinzaid
- Department of Human Genetics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Marc D Schwartz
- Department of Oncology, Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer, Georgetown University, 2115 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 300, Washington, DC, 20007, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Systematic review of outcomes in studies of reproductive genetic carrier screening: Towards development of a core outcome set. Genet Med 2021; 24:1-14. [PMID: 34906455 DOI: 10.1016/j.gim.2021.08.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/03/2021] [Revised: 06/09/2021] [Accepted: 09/10/2021] [Indexed: 01/08/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Current practice recommendations support the widespread implementation of reproductive genetic carrier screening (RGCS). These consensus-based recommendations highlight a research gap, with findings from current studies being insufficient to meet the standard required for more rigorous evidence-based recommendations. This systematic review assessed methodological aspects of studies on RGCS to inform the need for a core outcome set. METHODS We conducted a systematic search to identify peer-reviewed published studies offering population-based RGCS. Study designs, outcomes, and measurement methods were extracted. A narrative synthesis was conducting using an existing outcome taxonomy and criteria used in the evaluation of genetic screening programs as frameworks. RESULTS Sixty-five publications were included. We extracted 120 outcomes representing 24 outcome domains. Heterogeneity in outcome selection, measurement methods and time points of assessment was extensive. Quality appraisal raised concerns for bias. We found that reported outcomes had limited applicability to criteria used to evaluate genetic screening programs. CONCLUSION Despite a large body of literature, diverse approaches to research have limited the conclusions that can be cumulatively drawn from this body of evidence. Consensus regarding meaningful outcomes for evaluation of RGCS would be a valuable first step in working towards evidence-based practice recommendations, supporting the development of a core outcome set.
Collapse
|
6
|
Conijn T, Nijmeijer SCM, Lakeman P, Henneman L, Wijburg FA, Haverman L. Preconception expanded carrier screening: Impact of information presented by text or video on genetic knowledge and attitudes. J Genet Couns 2021; 30:457-469. [PMID: 32940388 PMCID: PMC8048558 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1332] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/07/2020] [Revised: 08/18/2020] [Accepted: 08/20/2020] [Indexed: 01/17/2023]
Abstract
Preconception expanded carrier screening (ECS) aims to identify couples with an increased risk of having a child with an autosomal recessive (AR) disorder before pregnancy, thereby enabling reproductive choices. Genetic knowledge and experiential knowledge both influence the uptake of ECS. As people in the general public often lack such knowledge, it is essential to provide appropriate and understandable information when offering ECS. This study investigated the effect of an educational video, compared to an educational text, on the knowledge and attitudes toward preconception ECS in the general population. Both the text and video consisted of a brief educational summary on AR inheritance and on the type of disorders included in ECS, with the progressive neurodegenerative condition mucopolysaccharidosis type III (MPS III) as an example. Participants in the reproductive age were invited in collaboration with a research agency. Respondents (N = 789) were offered an educational video prior to completing an online questionnaire that examined genetic knowledge, the perceived severity of MPS III, perceived risk, and attitudes toward ECS. Outcomes were compared to reference data collected previously in which respondents had been offered an educational text (N = 781). We first again studied the attitudes toward ECS in a smaller educational text group (N = 266) in order to assess whether attitudes had changed over time due to increased media coverage on ECS, which did not reveal any significant changes. Respondents who were offered the video had a better genetic knowledge, perceived MPS III as more severe, perceived their risks higher and were more likely to participate in ECS compared to those who were offered text. Online video may well be used as supportive tool to the genetic counseling process, creating more knowledge on ECS and severe genetic disorders included in preconception screening panels.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thirsa Conijn
- Pediatric Metabolic DiseasesEmma Children's Hospital and Amsterdam Lysosome Center “Sphinx”Amsterdam UMCUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamNetherlands
- Psychosocial departmentEmma Children's HospitalAmsterdam UMC, University of AmsterdamAmsterdamNetherlands
| | - Stephanie C. M. Nijmeijer
- Pediatric Metabolic DiseasesEmma Children's Hospital and Amsterdam Lysosome Center “Sphinx”Amsterdam UMCUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamNetherlands
| | - Phillis Lakeman
- Department of Clinical GeneticsAmsterdam Reproduction and Development Research InstituteAmsterdam UMCUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamNetherlands
| | - Lidewij Henneman
- Department of Clinical GeneticsAmsterdam Reproduction and Development Research InstituteAmsterdam UMCVrije Universiteit AmsterdamAmsterdamNetherlands
| | - Frits A. Wijburg
- Pediatric Metabolic DiseasesEmma Children's Hospital and Amsterdam Lysosome Center “Sphinx”Amsterdam UMCUniversity of AmsterdamAmsterdamNetherlands
| | - Lotte Haverman
- Psychosocial departmentEmma Children's HospitalAmsterdam UMC, University of AmsterdamAmsterdamNetherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Cohen SA, Bradbury A, Henderson V, Hoskins K, Bednar E, Arun BK. Genetic Counseling and Testing in a Community Setting: Quality, Access, and Efficiency. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2019; 39:e34-e44. [PMID: 31099680 DOI: 10.1200/edbk_238937] [Citation(s) in RCA: 50] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
There is an increasing need for genetic counseling and testing for individuals diagnosed with cancer, as treatment may be affected by the results. In addition, the identification of individuals before a diagnosis of cancer allows for optimal surveillance and early detection and prevention of cancer. With the recognition that as much as 10% of all cancers are hereditary, there is a growing need to improve access to genetic counseling and genetic testing, both before and at the time of diagnosis. This article focuses on models of identifying at-risk patients, including underserved communities; providing genetic counseling and testing in community practices; using telehealth; and collaborating with nongenetics health care providers and technological solutions to maximize efficiency and access.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie A Cohen
- 1 Cancer Genetics Risk Assessment Program, Ascension St. Vincent, Indianapolis, IN
| | - Angela Bradbury
- 2 Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | | | - Kent Hoskins
- 3 The University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL
| | - Erica Bednar
- 4 The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Banu K Arun
- 4 The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| |
Collapse
|