Protocol for implementation of family health history collection and decision support into primary care using a computerized family health history system

Integrating hereditary breast and ovarian cancer genetic counselling and testing into mainstream clinical practice: Legal and ethical challenges

Health professionals not specialized in genetics are expected to take an increasing role in genetic services delivery. This article aims to identify legal and ethical challenges related to a collaborative oncogenetics service model, where non-genetic health professionals provide genetic services to patients. Through a scoping literature review, we identified issues to the provision of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer, or other hereditary adult cancers, genetic testing under this model. Concerns that arose in the literature were informed consent, lack of adherence to best practice guidelines, lack of education of non-genetic health professionals on the provision of genetic services, psychological impacts of genetic testing, continuity of care, the complexity of genetic test results, confidentiality, risks of medical mismanagement, and the associated medical responsibility liabilities. Despite these challenges, there is a growing consensus towards the feasibility of cancer genetic testing being undertaken by non-genetic healthcare professionals in a collaborative oncogenetics service model.

Family history recording in UK general practice: the lIFeLONG study

BACKGROUND

In order to integrate genomic medicine into routine patient care and stratify personal risk, it is increasingly important to record family history (FH) information in general/family practice records. This is true for classic genetic disease as well as multifactorial conditions. Research suggests that FH recording is currently inadequate.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an up-to-date analysis of the frequency, quality, and accuracy of FH recording in UK general/family practice.

METHODS

An exploratory study, based at St Leonard's Practice, Exeter-a suburban UK general/family practice. Selected adult patients registered for over 1 year were contacted by post and asked to complete a written FH questionnaire. The reported information was compared with the patients' electronic medical record (EMR). Each EMR was assessed for its frequency (how often information was recorded), quality (the level of detail included), and accuracy (how closely the information matched the patient report) of FH recording.

RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-one patients were approached, 65 (27.0%) responded and 62 (25.7%) were eligible to participate. Forty-three (69.4%) EMRs contained FH information. The most commonly recorded conditions were bowel cancer, breast cancer, diabetes, and heart disease. The mean quality score was 3.64 (out of 5). There was little negative recording. 83.2% of patient-reported FH information was inaccurately recorded or missing from the EMRs.

CONCLUSION

FH information in general/family practice records should be better prepared for the genomic era. Whilst some conditions are well recorded, there is a need for more frequent, higher quality recording with greater accuracy, especially for multifactorial conditions.

Literacy-adapted, electronic family history assessment for genetics referral in primary care: patient user insights from qualitative interviews

BACKGROUND

Risk assessment for hereditary cancer syndromes is recommended in primary care, but family history is rarely collected in enough detail to facilitate risk assessment and referral - a roadblock that disproportionately impacts individuals with healthcare access barriers. We sought to qualitatively assess a literacy-adapted, electronic patient-facing family history tool developed for use in diverse, underserved patient populations recruited in the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) Study.

METHODS

Interview participants were recruited from a subpopulation of CHARM participants who experienced barriers to tool use in terms of spending a longer time to complete the tool, having incomplete attempts, and/or providing inaccurate family history in comparison to a genetic counselor-collected standard. We conducted semi-structured interviews with participants about barriers and facilitators to tool use and overall tool acceptability; interviews were recorded and professionally transcribed. Transcripts were coded based on a codebook developed using inductive techniques, and coded excerpts were reviewed to identify overarching themes related to barriers and facilitators to family history self-assessment and acceptability of the study tool.

RESULTS

Interviewees endorsed the tool as easy to navigate and understand. However, they described barriers related to family history information, literacy and language, and certain tool functions. Participants offered concrete, easy-to-implement solutions to each barrier. Despite experience barriers to use of the tool, most participants indicated that electronic family history self-assessment was acceptable or preferable in comparison to clinician-collected family history.

CONCLUSIONS

Even for participants who experienced barriers to tool use, family history self-assessment was considered an acceptable alternative to clinician-collected family history. Barriers experienced could be overcome with minor adaptations to the current family history tool.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is a sub-study of the Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) trial, ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03426878. Registered 8 February 2018.

Establishment of primary health information in the COVID-19 outbreak: A cross-sectional study of population awareness of self-testing

The global pandemic of the Corona Virus Disease 2019 is a severe threat to human health. This paper aims to investigate the status of mass health self-examination awareness and its influencing factors during the COVID-19 epidemic and establish complete health information to intervene in the prevention and control of the COVID-19 epidemic. The study used a simple random sampling method to survey permanent residents (9761 people) aged 15–70 years in a region of Jiangsu Province, China. The survey collected data using a questionnaire with acceptable reliability and validity. The data were entered into SPSS 26, and the data were analyzed using the chi-square test, ANOVA, and logistic regression. The differences in the status of mass health self-examination during COVID-19 were statistically significant (P < 0.05) in terms of the literacy level of the grassroots population, ease of access to medical care, primary medical and health conditions, the situation of medical examination programs, and the construction of primary health information technology. The establishment of comprehensive and systematic primary health information can effectively assist in raising people's awareness of health self-examination and promoting health behaviors, which is essential for enhancing COVID-19 prevention and intervention.

A scoping review of risk-stratified bowel screening: current evidence, future directions

PURPOSE

In this scoping review, we examined the international literature on risk-stratified bowel screening to develop recommendations for future research, practice and policy.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched from inception to 18 October 2021: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Forward and backwards citation searches were also undertaken. All relevant literature were included.

RESULTS

After de-deduplication, 3,629 records remained. 3,416 were excluded at the title/abstract screening stage. A further 111 were excluded at full-text screening stage. In total, 102 unique studies were included. Results showed that risk-stratified bowel screening programmes can potentially improve diagnostic performance, but there is a lack of information on longer-term outcomes. Risk models do appear to show promise in refining existing risk stratification guidelines but most were not externally validated and less than half achieved good discriminatory power. Risk assessment tools in primary care have the potential for high levels of acceptability and uptake, and therefore, could form an important component of future risk-stratified bowel screening programmes, but sometimes the screening recommendations were not adhered to by the patient or healthcare provider. The review identified important knowledge gaps, most notably in the area of organisation of screening services due to few pilots, and what risk stratification might mean for inequalities.

CONCLUSION

We recommend that future research focuses on what organisational challenges risk-stratified bowel screening may face and a consideration of inequalities in any changes to organised bowel screening programmes.

A Family and a Genome-Wide Polygenic Risk Score Are Independently Associated With Stroke in a Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Positive family history and genetic risk scores have been shown to independently capture those individuals with high risk for stroke. The aim of our study was to evaluate the amount of shared information between family history and genetic risk and to investigate their combined effect on the association with prevalent and incident stroke cases.

METHODS

We obtained a family risk score (FamRS), weighted for disease onset and family size as well as genome-wide polygenic risk score (PGS) including over 3.2 million single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the population-based prospective KORA F3 (Cooperative Health Research in the Region of Augsburg) study (n=3071) from Southern Germany. FamRS and PGS were evaluated separately and combined. The measures were once treated as continuous variables but also divided in the highest 20%, 10%, 5%, and 1% percentiles. Odds ratios via logistic regression and hazard ratios via Cox regression were estimated. A stroke event was defined as a hospitalization for stroke that was self-reported in a standardized interview by certified and supervised personnel.

RESULTS

The FamRS outperformed other simplified family measures such as affected parents or number of affected family members. FamRS and PGS were not correlated, and no individuals were observed with both very high FamRS and very high PGS (top 1% percentile). In a combined model, both FamRS and PGS were independently from each other associated with risk of stroke, also independent of other traditional risk factors (p [FamRS]=0.02, p [PGS]=0.005). Individuals in the top 1% of either FamRS or PGS were found to have >5-fold risk for stroke (odds ratios, 5.82 [95% CI, 2.08-14]; P=0.0002). The results for incident stroke events showed the same trend but were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that a family risk score and PGS capture different information concerning individual stroke risk. Combining the risk measures FamRS and PGS increases predictive power, as demonstrated in a population-based study.

Equity in Genomic Medicine

Since the completion of the Human Genome Project, considerable progress has been made in translating knowledge about the genetic basis of disease risk and treatment response into clinical services and public health interventions that have greater precision. It is anticipated that more precision approaches to early detection, prevention, and treatment will be developed and will enhance equity in healthcare and outcomes among disparity populations. Reduced access to genomic medicine research, clinical services, and public health interventions has the potential to exacerbate disparities in genomic medicine. The purpose of this article is to describe these challenges to equity in genomic medicine and identify opportunities and future directions for addressing these issues. Efforts are needed to enhance access to genomic medicine research, clinical services, and public health interventions, and additional research that examines the clinical utility of precision medicine among disparity populations should be prioritized to ensure equity in genomic medicine. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, Volume 23 is October 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

Mapping Users' Experience of a Family History and Genetic Risk Algorithm Tool in Primary Care

INTRODUCTION

The development of a family history (FH) questionnaire (FHQ) provides an insight into a patient's familiarity of a trait and helps to identify individuals at increased risk of disease. A critical aspect of developing a new tool is exploring users' experience.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to examine users' experience, obstacles and challenges, and their views and concerns in the applicability of a new tool for determining genetic risk in Slovenia's primary care.

METHODS

We used a qualitative approach. The participants completed a risk assessment software questionnaire that calculates users' likelihood of developing familial diseases. Audio-taped semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted to evaluate their experience. There were 21 participants, and analyses using the constant comparative method were employed.

RESULTS

We identified 3 main themes: obstacles/key issues, suggestions for improvements, and coping. The participants were poorly satisfied with the clarity of instructions, technical usability problems, and issues with the entry of relatives' data. They expressed satisfaction with some of the characteristics of the FHQ (e.g., straightforward and friendly format, easy entry, and comprehension). They suggested simpler language, that the disease risk should be targeted toward the disease, that the FHQ should include patient-specific recommendations, and that it should be part of the electronic medical records. When discussing what would they do with the results of the FHQ, the participants used different coping strategies: active (e.g., seeking information) or passive (e.g., avoidance).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

User experience was shown to be a synthesis of obstacles, overcoming them with suggestions for improvements, and exploration of various coping mechanisms that may emerge from dealing with the stressor of "being at risk."

An Integrative Review of Family Health History in Pediatrics

The aim of this integrative review is to investigate current literature regarding family health history (FHH) taking practices, attitudes, and challenges in the pediatric outpatient setting. FHH is a known clinical tool for providers; however, there are no explicit standards for pediatric FHH collection. The integrative review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases were searched for publications between January 2010 and December 2019, and 8 articles were selected for evaluation. Three themes are explored in this review: FHH collection practices, challenges, and tools. FHH collection practices were found to be inconsistent and the most commonly cited challenge was time. No validated FHH collection tools have been identified for the pediatric population. These findings suggest the need for standardization in FHH collection and further development of tools to improve FHH collection.

Effectiveness of interventions to identify and manage patients with familial cancer risk in primary care: a systematic review

This systematic review evaluated the effectiveness of strategies to identify and manage patients with familial risk of breast, ovarian, colorectal and prostate cancer in primary care to improve clinical outcomes. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane library were searched from January 1980 to October 2017. We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) and non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSI). Primary outcomes were cancer incidence, cancer-related clinical outcomes or the identification of cancer predisposition; secondary outcomes were the appropriateness of referral, uptake of preventive strategies and cognitive and psychological effect. From 11,842 abstracts, 111 full texts were reviewed and three eligible studies (nine articles) identified. Two were cluster RCTs and one NRSI; all used risk assessment software. No studies identified our primary outcomes, with no consistent outcome across the three studies. In one RCT, intervention improved the proportion of genetic referrals meeting referral guidelines for breast cancer (OR 4.5, 95% CI 1.6 to 13.1). In the other RCT, there was no difference in screening adherence between the intervention and control group. However, there was borderline increased risk perception (OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.99 to 3.59) in the subgroup that under-estimated their colon cancer risk. In the NRSI, there was no change in psychological distress in patients at increased familial breast cancer risk, but population risk patients had reduced anxiety after intervention (state anxiety mean change - 3, 95% CI - 5 to - 2). Future studies should have better-defined comparator groups and longer follow-up and assess outcomes using validated tools.

Family History Taking in Pediatric Practice: A Qualitative Interview Study

BACKGROUND

Family history (FH) is a risk factor for many conditions in pediatric practice. There is no standard of care regarding FH taking, and only a few published studies about current practice.

OBJECTIVES

To explore in depth pediatricians' perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, and practices regarding FH taking.

METHODS

The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) was used to develop a comprehensive interview scheme. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with community pediatricians. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a thematic approach and the constant comparison method.

RESULTS

Eleven pediatricians were interviewed. FH was found to be a firmly embedded, complex, and important aspect of pediatric practice. Participants described FH as part of regular holistic care. FH and social history were linked and often appeared to be part of the same concept to participants. FH was used for a range of purposes. In addition to risk assessment, FH information helped clarify diagnosis and select medication, tailor overall patient management based on family circumstance, and provide psychosocial support for parents. Participants expressed confidence in their FH skills and reported tailoring their approach with experience. Most were not concerned about formal evidence for FH and would not change their practice except for "good reason."

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the TDF helped ensure a comprehensive approach to FH taking in pediatric practice. The findings suggest that FH taking in this setting is a complex activity, embedded in routine care. Efforts to make FH taking more systematic may founder if they fail to take into account pediatricians' attitudes, perspectives, and practices.

Expectations versus reality: The impact of men's expectancy violations in conversations with healthcare providers about BRCA-related cancer risks

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the experiences of men with germline pathogenic BRCA variants or who have a first-degree family member who tested positive for BRCA regarding their interactions with healthcare providers about their cancer risks.

METHODS

25 phone interviews were conducted with men at risk for hereditary cancer. Data were analyzed using an iterative approach where emergent themes were compared to existing research and theories.

RESULTS

Informed by Expectancy Violation Theory (EVT), a model for understanding men's experiences when interacting with healthcare providers about their BRCA-related cancer risks-comprised of three stages including expectation, violation, and outcomes-was developed.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings show the importance of men's basic expectations for patient-provider interactions and how violations of expectations impact perceptions, communication, and behavior. Outcomes of negative expectancy violations may impact not only men with BRCA-related cancer risks but also their family members.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Healthcare providers can be mindful about the ways in which they positively and negatively violate patients' expectations. Patients can engage in self-advocacy behaviors, and advocacy organizations can design resources for patients and healthcare providers to encourage and support effective communication between providers, patients, and their family members.

What characterizes cancer family history collection tools? A critical literature review

Background

Many tools have been developed for the standardized collection of cancer family history (fh). However, it remains unclear which tools have the potential to help health professionals overcome traditional barriers to collecting such histories. In this review, we describe the characteristics, validation process, and performance of existing tools and appraise the extent to which those tools can support health professionals in identifying and managing at-risk individuals.

Methods

Studies were identified through searches of the medline, embase, and Cochrane central databases from October 2015 to September 2016. Articles were included if they described a cancer fh collection tool, its use, and its validation process.

Results

Based on seventy-nine articles published between February 1978 and September 2016, 62 tools were identified. Most of the tools were paper-based and designed to be self-administered by lay individuals. One quarter of the tools could automatically produce pedigrees, provide cancer-risk assessment, and deliver evidence-based recommendations. One third of the tools were validated against a standard reference for collected fh quality and cancer-risk assessment. Only 3 tools were integrated into an electronic health records system.

Conclusions

In the present review, we found no tool with characteristics that might make it an efficient clinical support for health care providers in cancer-risk identification and management. Adequately validated tools that are connected to electronic health records are needed to encourage the systematic identification of individuals at increased risk of cancer.

Family health history: an essential starting point for personalized risk assessment and disease prevention

Family health history (FHH) information is well established as a basis for assessing a patient's personal disease risk, but is underutilized for diagnosis and making medical recommendations. Epidemiological and genetic information have heightened the value of FHH to an individual's health. This has motivated the development of new FHH collection tools and strategies for family members, but will require greater awareness and knowledge by both patients and practitioners. FHH will be increasingly important as genomic data become a mainstay of medical diagnostics, since in many cases, a medically important FHH results from lineage-specific genetic variants. The impact of complementary FHH and genomic information will drive the pursuit of personalized and precise targeting of treatments and interventions aimed at maintaining patient health.

Barriers and Facilitators to Adoption of Genomic Services for Colorectal Care within the Veterans Health Administration

We examined facilitators and barriers to adoption of genomic services for colorectal care, one of the first genomic medicine applications, within the Veterans Health Administration to shed light on areas for practice change. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 58 clinicians to understand use of the following genomic services for colorectal care: family health history documentation, molecular and genetic testing, and genetic counseling. Data collection and analysis were informed by two conceptual frameworks, the Greenhalgh Diffusion of Innovation and Andersen Behavioral Model, to allow for concurrent examination of both access and innovation factors. Specialists were more likely than primary care clinicians to obtain family history to investigate hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC), but with limited detail; clinicians suggested templates to facilitate retrieval and documentation of family history according to guidelines. Clinicians identified advantage of molecular tumor analysis prior to genetic testing, but tumor testing was infrequently used due to perceived low disease burden. Support from genetic counselors was regarded as facilitative for considering hereditary basis of CRC diagnosis, but there was variability in awareness of and access to this expertise. Our data suggest the need for tools and policies to establish and disseminate well-defined processes for accessing services and adhering to guidelines.

A Quality Improvement Collaborative to Improve Pediatric Primary Care Genetic Services

OBJECTIVE

To investigate if a national pediatric primary care quality improvement collaborative (QIC) could improve and sustain adherence with process measures related to diagnosis and management of children with genetic disorders.

METHODS

Thirteen practices in 11 states from the American Academy of Pediatrics' Quality Improvement Innovation Networks participated in a 6-month QIC that included regular educational opportunities, access to genetic professionals, and performance feedback. The QIC identified 11 aims related to improving diagnosis and management of children with genetic disorders. The practices evaluated adherence by reviewing patient records at baseline, monthly for 6 months (active improvement period), and then once 6 months after the QIC's conclusion to check for sustainability. Random intercept binomial regression models with practice level random intercepts were used to compare adherence over time for each aim.

RESULTS

During the active improvement period, statistically significant improvements in adherence were observed for 4 of the 7 aims achieving minimal data submission levels. For example, adherence improved for family histories created/maintained at health supervision visits documenting all components of the family history (6% vs 60%, P < .001), and for patients with specific genetic disorders who received recommended care (58% vs 85%, P < .001). All 4 of these aims also demonstrated statistically significant improvements during the sustainability period.

CONCLUSIONS

A national QIC reveals promise in improving and sustaining adherence with process measures related to the diagnosis and management of genetic disorders. Future research should focus on patient outcome measures and the optimal number of aims to pursue in QICs.

Social determinants of family health history collection

Family health history (FHH) is the most basic form of genomic information. Although public health efforts have been made to promote FHH collection, empirical data on the extent to which community residents in rural areas actively collect FHH is limited. Therefore, we examined rates of FHH collection in a community-based sample of South Carolina residents. We conducted a structured telephone survey in a random sample of black and white South Carolina residents. Respondents were asked if they had ever actively collected FHH from relatives using an item developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Overall, 42 % of respondents reported that they had actively collected their FHH. Blacks were significantly more likely than whites to have collected their FHH in bivariate analysis, but race did not have a significant association with FHH collection in the multivariate model (OR = 1.36, 95 % CI = 0.79, 2.35, p = 0.26). The likelihood of collecting FHH was increased among respondents whose last medical visit occurred in the past year compared to those whose last medical visit was more than 1 year ago (OR = 2.00, 95 % CI = 1.12, 3.56, p = 0.02). In addition, older respondents had a reduced likelihood of collecting their FHH (OR = 0.69, 95 % CI = 0.53, 0.90, p = .01). Lastly, women were about twice as likely as men to have collected their FHH (OR = 1.83, 95 % CI = 1.12, 2.99, p = 0.02). Greater efforts are needed to increase the collection of FHH information; these efforts may need to target men, the elderly, and individuals who have not had a recent medical visit.

Genetics in primary health care and the National Policy on Comprehensive Care for People with Rare Diseases in Brazil: opportunities and challenges for professional education

As discoveries regarding the genetic contribution to disease have grown rapidly, health care professionals are expected to incorporate genetic and genomic perspectives into health education and practice. Genetic competencies common to all health professionals have been identified by the US National Coalition for Health Professional Education in Genetics (NCHPEG), which defined the knowledge, skills, and attitudes required to achieve these competencies. The aim of this study is to analyze genetic competencies of primary health care professionals in Brazil. It is a descriptive survey study, whereby doctors, nurses, and dentists were invited to participate by answering a questionnaire including 11 issues based on competencies established by the NCHPEG. Data were presented as percentages. Differences between groups of participants were assessed by the Fisher exact test, with the level of significance set at p < 0.05. Results showed that concerning knowledge, about 80 % of the participants recognized basic genetics terminology, but practitioners had difficulty in identifying patterns of inheritance. Regarding clinical skills, practitioners were able to recognize facial dysmorphias and identify situations where referral of patients to specialists was necessary. Nevertheless, there were challenges in the process of valuing and gathering information about family history. Regarding attitudes, 68.9 % of the participants thought about the comprehensiveness of care but faced challenges in counselling parents. The results of this study may contribute to developing an ongoing education program for primary health care professionals, leading to a strategy to overcome the challenges of including genetics in the Brazilian Unified Health System.

Translational Genomics in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Opportunities and Challenges

Translation of genomic discoveries into patient care is slowly becoming a reality in developed economies around the world. In contrast, low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) have participated minimally in genomic research for several reasons including the lack of coherent national policies, the limited number of well-trained genomic scientists, poor research infrastructure, and local economic and cultural challenges. Recent initiatives such as the Human Heredity and Health in Africa (H3Africa), the Qatar Genome Project, and the Mexico National Institute of Genomic Medicine (INMEGEN) that aim to address these problems through capacity building and empowerment of local researchers have sparked a paradigm shift. In this short communication, we describe experiences of small-scale medical genetics and translational genomic research programs in LMIC. The lessons drawn from these programs drive home the importance of addressing resource, policy, and sociocultural dynamics to realize the promise of precision medicine driven by genomic science globally. By echoing lessons from a bench-to-community translational genomic research, we advocate that large-scale genomic research projects can be successfully linked with health care programs. To harness the benefits of genomics-led health care, LMIC governments should begin to develop national genomics policies that will address human and technology capacity development within the context of their national economic and sociocultural uniqueness. These policies should encourage international collaboration and promote the link between the public health program and genomics researchers. Finally, we highlight the potential catalytic roles of the global community to foster translational genomics in LMIC.

General Practitioners and Breast Surgeons in France, Germany, Netherlands and the UK show variable breast cancer risk communication profiles

BACKGROUND

No information is available on the attitudes of General Practitioners (GPs) and Breast Surgeons (BSs) to their delivery of genetic, environmental and lifestyle risk factor information about breast cancer. The aim of this study was to describe the Breast Cancer Risk Communication Behaviours (RCBs) reported by GPs and BSs in four European countries and to determine the relationships between their RCBs and their socio-occupational characteristics.

METHODS

Self-administered questionnaires assessing breast cancer risk communication behaviours using vignettes were mailed to a sample of Breast Surgeons (BS) and General Practitioners (GP) working in France, Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK (N = 7292). Their responses to questions about the risk factors were first ordered and compared by specialty and country after making multivariate adjustments. Rather than defining a standard Risk Presentation Format (RPF) a priori, the various RPFs used by the respondents were analyzed using cluster analysis.

RESULTS

Family history and hormonal replacement therapy were the risk factors most frequently mentioned by the 2094 respondents included in this study. Lifestyle BC risk factors such as obesity and alcohol were rarely/occasionally mentioned, but this point differed (p < 0.001) depending on the country and the specialty of the providers involved. Five distinct RPF profiles including the numerical/verbal presentation of absolute/relative risks were identified. The most frequently encountered RPF (34.2%) was characterized by the fact that it included no negative framing of the risks, i.e., the probability of not developing cancer was not mentioned. Age, specialty and country of practice were all found to be significant determinants of the RPF clusters.

CONCLUSIONS

The increasing trend for GPs and BSs to discuss lifestyle risk factors with their patients suggests that this may be a relevant means of improving breast cancer prevention. Physicians' risk communication skills should be improved during their initial and vocational training.

Multi-source development of an integrated model for family health history

OBJECTIVE

To integrate data elements from multiple sources for informing comprehensive and standardized collection of family health history (FHH).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three types of sources were analyzed to identify data elements associated with the collection of FHH. First, clinical notes from multiple resources were annotated for FHH information. Second, questions and responses for family members in patient-facing FHH tools were examined. Lastly, elements defined in FHH-related specifications were extracted for several standards development and related organizations. Data elements identified from the notes, tools, and specifications were subsequently combined and compared.

RESULTS

In total, 891 notes from three resources, eight tools, and seven specifications associated with four organizations were analyzed. The resulting Integrated FHH Model consisted of 44 data elements for describing source of information, family members, observations, and general statements about family history. Of these elements, 16 were common to all three source types, 17 were common to two, and 11 were unique. Intra-source comparisons also revealed common and unique elements across the different notes, tools, and specifications.

DISCUSSION

Through examination of multiple sources, a representative and complementary set of FHH data elements was identified. Further work is needed to create formal representations of the Integrated FHH Model, standardize values associated with each element, and inform context-specific implementations.

CONCLUSIONS

There has been increased emphasis on the importance of FHH for supporting personalized medicine, biomedical research, and population health. Multi-source development of an integrated model could contribute to improving the standardized collection and use of FHH information in disparate systems.

Evaluation of a novel electronic genetic screening and clinical decision support tool in prenatal clinical settings

"The Pregnancy and Health Profile" (PHP) is a free prenatal genetic screening and clinical decision support (CDS) software tool for prenatal providers. PHP collects family health history (FHH) during intake and provides point-of-care risk assessment for providers and education for patients. This pilot study evaluated patient and provider responses to PHP and effects of using PHP in practice. PHP was implemented in four clinics. Surveys assessed provider confidence and knowledge and patient and provider satisfaction with PHP. Data on the implementation process were obtained through semi-structured interviews with administrators. Quantitative survey data were analyzed using Chi square test, Fisher's exact test, paired t tests, and multivariate logistic regression. Open-ended survey questions and interviews were analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis. Of the 83% (513/618) of patients that provided feedback, 97% felt PHP was easy to use and 98% easy to understand. Thirty percent (21/71) of participating physicians completed both pre- and post-implementation feedback surveys [13 obstetricians (OBs) and 8 family medicine physicians (FPs)]. Confidence in managing genetic risks significantly improved for OBs on 2/6 measures (p values ≤0.001) but not for FPs. Physician knowledge did not significantly change. Providers reported value in added patient engagement and reported mixed feedback about the CDS report. We identified key steps, resources, and staff support required to implement PHP in a clinical setting. To our knowledge, this study is the first to report on the integration of patient-completed, electronically captured and CDS-enabled FHH software into primary prenatal practice. PHP is acceptable to patients and providers. Key to successful implementation in the future will be customization options and interoperability with electronic health records.

Latino Immigrants' Biological Parents' Histories of Substance Use Problems in Their Country of Origin Predict Their Pre- and Post-Immigration Alcohol Use Problems

BACKGROUND

No studies to date have assessed whether recent young adult (aged 18-34) Latino immigrants' biological parents' histories of substance use problems (BPHSUP) in their country of origin predict their alcohol use problems at pre- and post-immigration to the United States (US).

METHODS

BPHSUP in their country of origin were assessed via interviews conducted by bilingual Latino researchers with recent Latino immigrants primarily from Cuba and Central and South America recruited through respondent-driven sampling at the time of their immigration to southeastern US. Three waves of data were collected to document Latino immigrants' severity of alcohol use problems at pre-immigration and 2 annual post-immigration follow-up assessments. BPHSUP+/- status was used as a predictor of Latinos' (N = 452; 45.8% female, 54.2% male) Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) scores at pre- and post-immigration with age, education, and income as covariates as wells as odds ratios for AUDIT classifications of hazardous use, harmful use, and dependence.

RESULTS

BPHSUP+ status predicted Latino immigrants' higher AUDIT scores pre- and post-immigration by gender (P < .01) compared with Latino immigrants of BPHSUP- status, controlling for age, education, and income. BPHSUP+ status predicted odds ratios of 3.45 and 2.91 for AUDIT alcohol dependence classification for men and women, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study documents that BPHSUP+/- status in their country of origin predict their young adult Latino offspring's severity of alcohol use problems pre- and post-immigration. These results may inform (1) community-based health care providers to screen recent young adult Latino immigrants for their BPHSUP+/- status and severity of alcohol use problems to redirect trajectories away from alcohol use disorders toward more normative post-immigration outcomes through culturally relevant prevention services and (2) future research advantages of differential susceptibility theory. Implications for future research and the need for replication studies in other geographic regions of the US are discussed.

Implementation of an electronic genomic and family health history tool in primary prenatal care

"The Pregnancy and Health Profile," (PHP) is a free genetic risk assessment software tool for primary prenatal providers that collects patient-entered family (FHH), personal, and obstetrical health history, performs risk assessment, and presents the provider with clinical decision support during the prenatal encounter. The tool is freely available for download at www.hughesriskapps.net. We evaluated the implementation of PHP in four geographically diverse clinical sites. Retrospective chart reviews were conducted for patients seen prior to the study period and for patients who used the PHP to collect data on documentation of FHH, discussion of cystic fibrosis (CF) and hemoglobinopathy (HB) carrier screening, and CF and HB interventions (tests, referrals). Five hundred pre-implementation phase and 618 implementation phase charts were reviewed. Documentation of a 3-generation FHH or pedigree improved at three sites; patient race/ethnicity at three sites, father of the baby (FOB) race/ethnicity at all sites, and ancestry for the patient and FOB at three sites (P < 0.001-0001). CF counseling improved for implementation phase patients at one site (8% vs. 48%, P < 0.0001) and CF screening/referrals at two (2% vs. 14%, P < 0.0001; 6% vs. 14%; P = 0.05). Counseling and intervention rates did not increase for HB. This preliminary study suggests that the PHP can improve documentation of FHH, race, and ancestry, as well as the compliance with current CF counseling and intervention guidelines in some prenatal clinics. Future evaluation of the PHP should include testing in a larger number of clinical environments, assessment of additional performance measures, and evaluation of the system's overall clinical utility.

Quality of family history collection with use of a patient facing family history assessment tool

Background

Studies have shown that the quality of family health history (FHH) collection in primary care is inadequate to assess disease risk. To use FHH for risk assessment, collected data must have adequate detail. To address this issue, we developed a patient facing FHH assessment tool, MeTree. In this paper we report the content and quality of the FHH collected using MeTree.

Methods

Design: A hybrid implementation-effectiveness study. Patients were recruited from 2009 to 2012. Setting: Two community primary care clinics in Greensboro, NC. Participants: All non-adopted adult English speaking patients with upcoming appointments were invited to participate. Intervention: Education about and collection of FHH with entry into MeTree. Measures: We report the proportion of pedigrees that were high-quality. High-quality pedigrees are defined as having all the following criteria: (1) three generations of relatives, (2) relatives’ lineage, (3) relatives’ gender, (4) an up-to-date FHH, (5) pertinent negatives noted, (6) age of disease onset in affected relatives, and for deceased relatives, (7) the age and (8) cause of death (Prim Care31:479–495, 2004.).

Results

Enrollment: 1,184. Participant demographics: age range 18-92 (mean 58.8, SD 11.79), 56% male, and 75% white. The median pedigree size was 21 (range 8-71) and the FHH entered into MeTree resulted in a database of 27,406 individuals. FHHs collected by MeTree were found to be high quality in 99.8% (N = 1,182/1,184) as compared to <4% at baseline. An average of 1.9 relatives per pedigree (range 0-50, SD 4.14) had no data reported. For pedigrees where at least one relative has no data (N = 497/1,184), 4.97 relatives per pedigree (range 1-50, SD 5.44) had no data. Talking with family members before using MeTree significantly decreased the proportion of relatives with no data reported (4.98% if you talked to your relative vs. 10.85% if you did not, p-value < 0.001.).

Conclusion

Using MeTree improves the quantity and quality of the FHH data that is collected and talking with relatives prior to the collection of FHH significantly improves the quantity and quality of the data provided. This allows more patients to be accurately risk stratified and offered appropriate preventive care guided by their risk level.

Trial number

NCT01372553

Comparing electronic health record portals to obtain patient-entered family health history in primary care

BACKGROUND

There is growing interest in developing systems to overcome barriers for acquiring and interpreting family health histories in primary care.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the capacity of three different electronic portals to collect family history from patients and deposit valid data in an electronic health record (EHR).

DESIGN

Pilot trial.

PARTICIPANTS, INTERVENTION

Patients were enrolled from four primary care practices and were asked to collect family health history before a physical exam using either telephone-based interactive voice response (IVR) technology, a secure Internet portal, or a waiting room laptop computer, with portal assigned by practice. Intervention practices were compared to a "usual care" practice, where there was no standard workflow to document family history (663 participants in the three intervention arms were compared to 296 participants from the control practice).

MAIN MEASURES

New documentation of any family history in a coded EHR field within 30 days of the visit. Secondary outcomes included participation rates and validity.

KEY RESULTS

Demographics varied by clinic. Documentation of new family history data was significantly higher, but modest, in each of the three intervention clinics (7.5 % for IVR clinic, 20.3 % for laptop clinic, and 23.1 % for patient portal clinic) versus the control clinic (1.7 %). Patient-entered data on common conditions in first degree relatives was confirmed as valid by a genetic counselor for the majority of cases (ranging from 64 to 82 % in the different arms).

CONCLUSIONS

Within primary care practices, valid patient entered family health history data can be obtained electronically at higher rates than a standard of care that depends on provider-entered data. Further research is needed to determine how best to match different portals to individual patient preference, how the tools can best be integrated with provider workflow, and to assess how they impact the use of screening and prevention.

Genetic services and attitudes in primary care pediatrics

Given the integral role primary care pediatricians (PCPs) play in caring for children with genetic conditions, we aimed to identify current practices of PCPs regarding genetic patients, their attitudes toward genetic medical care and their choices regarding family history taking. We conducted an on-line survey of a national convenience sample of PCPs associated with the American Academy of Pediatrics' Quality Improvement Innovation Networks. Eighty-eight respondents (29% response rate) were included in the analysis. Seventy-four (86%) reported ordering genetic based tests three or less times annually. Eleven (13%) strongly agreed that they discuss with patients the potential risks, benefits, and limitations of genetic tests. Forty-three (49%) agreed or strongly agreed that they feel competent in providing healthcare to patients related to genetics and genomics. Perceived competence was not associated with more recent training (P = 0.29), number of genetic tests ordered annually (P = 0.84) or mean number of weekly patient encounters (P = 0.15). 100% of participants stated that taking a family history is important. 27 (31%) agreed or strongly agreed that they gather a minimum of a three-generation family history. Forty-one of the 63 participants with an electronic health record (65%) reported their system was fair or poor in its ability to easily capture a three-generation family history. PCPs interested in quality improvement reported variation in care practices for children with genetic diseases and a majority did not feel competent to provide genetic related healthcare. Research should focus on improving the care and diagnosis of children with genetic disorders and enhanced integration of genetic medicine into routine primary preventative care.

Applications of electronic health information in public health: uses, opportunities & barriers

Electronic health information systems can reshape the practice of public health including public health surveillance, disease and injury investigation and control, decision making, quality assurance, and policy development. While these opportunities are potentially transformative, and the federal program for the Meaningful Use (MU) of electronic health records (EHRs) has included important public health components, significant barriers remain. Unlike incentives in the clinical care system, scant funding is available to public health departments to develop the necessary information infrastructure and workforce capacity to capitalize on EHRs, personal health records, or Big Data. Current EHR systems are primarily built to serve clinical systems and practice rather than being structured for public health use. In addition, there are policy issues concerning how broadly the data can be used by public health officials. As these issues are resolved and workable solutions emerge, they should yield a more efficient and effective public health system.

Family history tools for primary care are not ready yet to be implemented. A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Taking the family history helps the doctor in estimating the probability of disease in individual patients. However, significant barriers to obtaining adequate family history information remain. Tools overcoming these barriers might support family physicians in this task.

OBJECTIVE

To review systematically the characteristics of existing family history tools and discuss their potential use in primary care.

METHODS

Studies were identified through searches of PubMed, Embase and Cinahl from 1 January 2002 until May 2012. All authors independently screened studies and included original research papers on family history tools of which assessment had been performed or was planned. We reviewed diseases for which family history information was collected, study setting, tool design, type of family history collection, presence of risk-assessment and recommendations for management, and assessment (categorized as either validity or benefit).

RESULTS

Eighteen family history tools were identified: six generic, two on cardiovascular disease and ten on cancer. The six generic tools were partly tested in primary care (3x), are mainly computerized (4x), rarely include management recommendations for the physician (1x) and were partly validated against a reference standard (genetic counsellor) (3x, plus one planned). Of the five specific tools studied in primary care, none was validated. No family history tool allows electronic transfer of family history information to electronic medical record systems. Use of a family history tool improved identification of patients at risk for disease.

CONCLUSION

Several promising family history tools for primary care have been developed but large-scale implementation cannot be advised yet, based on available validation studies.

Patient and primary care provider experience using a family health history collection, risk stratification, and clinical decision support tool: a type 2 hybrid controlled implementation-effectiveness trial

BACKGROUND

Family health history (FHH) is the single strongest predictor of disease risk and yet is significantly underutilized in primary care. We developed a patient facing FHH collection tool, MeTree, that uses risk stratification to generate clinical decision support for breast cancer, colorectal cancer, ovarian cancer, hereditary cancer syndromes, and thrombosis. Here we present data on the experience of patients and providers after integration of MeTree into 2 primary care practices.

METHODS

This was a Type 2 hybrid controlled implementation-effectiveness study in 3 community-based primary care clinics in Greensboro, NC. All non-adopted adult English speaking patients with upcoming routine appointments were invited. Patients were recruited from December 2009 to the present and followed for one year. Ease of integration of MeTree into clinical practice at the two intervention clinics was evaluated through patient surveys after their appointment and at 3 months post-visit, and physician surveys 3 months after tool integration.

RESULTS

Total enrollment =1,184. Average time to complete MeTree = 27 minutes. Patients found MeTree: easy to use (93%), easy to understand (97%), useful (98%), raised awareness of disease risk (85%), and changed how they think about their health (86%). Of the 26% (N = 311) asking for assistance to complete the tool, age (65 sd 9.4 vs. 57 sd 11.8, p-value < 0.00) and large pedigree size (24.4 sd 9.81 vs. 22.2 sd 8.30, p-value < 0.00) were the only significant factors; 77% of those requiring assistance were over the age of 60. Providers (N = 14) found MeTree: improved their practice (86%), improved their understanding of FHH (64%), made practice easier (79%), and worthy of recommending to their peers (93%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that MeTree has broad acceptance and support from both patients and providers and can be implemented without disruption to workflow.

The genomic medicine model: an integrated approach to implementation of family health history in primary care

As an essential tool for risk stratification, family health history (FHH) is a central component of personalized medicine; yet, despite its widespread acceptance among professional societies and its established place in the medical interview, its widespread adoption is hindered by three major barriers: quality of FHH collection, risk stratification capabilities and interpretation of risk stratification for clinical care. To overcome these barriers and bring FHH to the forefront of the personalized medicine effort, we developed the genomic medicine model (GMM) for primary care. The GMM, founded upon the principles of the Health Belief Model, Adult Learning Theory and the implementation sciences, shifts responsibility for FHH onto the patient, uses information technology (MeTree©) for risk stratification and interpretation, and provides education across multiple levels for each stakeholder, freeing up the clinical encounter for discussion around personalized preventive healthcare plans. The GMM has been implemented and optimized as part of an implementation-effectiveness hybrid pilot study for breast/ovarian cancer, colon cancer and thrombosis, and risk for hereditary cancer syndromes in two primary care clinics in NC, USA. This paper describes the conceptual development of the model and key findings relevant for broader uptake and sustainability in the primary care community.

Personalizing prenatal care using family health history: identifying a panel of conditions for a novel electronic genetic screening tool

In the age of genomic medicine, family health history (FHH) remains an important tool for personalized risk assessment as it can inform approaches to disease prevention and management. In primary care, including in prenatal settings, providers recognize that FHH enables them to assess the risk for birth defects and complex conditions that not only affect the fetus health, but also the mother’s. However, many providers lack the time to gather FHH or the knowledge to confidently interpret the data. Electronic tools providing clinical decision support using FHH data can aid the busy provider with data collection and interpretation. We describe the scope of conditions included in a patient-entered FHH tool that provides clinical decision support and point-of-care education to assist with patient management. This report details how we selected the conditions for which it is appropriate to use FHH as a means to promote personalized medicine in primary prenatal care.

Implementing genomic medicine in the clinic: the future is here

Although the potential for genomics to contribute to clinical care has long been anticipated, the pace of defining the risks and benefits of incorporating genomic findings into medical practice has been relatively slow. Several institutions have recently begun genomic medicine programs, encountering many of the same obstacles and developing the same solutions, often independently. Recognizing that successful early experiences can inform subsequent efforts, the National Human Genome Research Institute brought together a number of these groups to describe their ongoing projects and challenges, identify common infrastructure and research needs, and outline an implementation framework for investigating and introducing similar programs elsewhere. Chief among the challenges were limited evidence and consensus on which genomic variants were medically relevant; lack of reimbursement for genomically driven interventions; and burden to patients and clinicians of assaying, reporting, intervening, and following up genomic findings. Key infrastructure needs included an openly accessible knowledge base capturing sequence variants and their phenotypic associations and a framework for defining and cataloging clinically actionable variants. Multiple institutions are actively engaged in using genomic information in clinical care. Much of this work is being done in isolation and would benefit from more structured collaboration and sharing of best practices.

Genet Med 2013:15(4):258–267

Genetic counselors' current use of personal health records-based family histories in genetic clinics and considerations for their future adoption

Given the widespread adoption of electronic medical records and recent emergence of electronic family history tools, we examined genetic counselors' perspectives on the emerging technology of the personal health record (PHR)-based family history tool that links to an electronic medical record (EMR). Two-hundred thirty-three genetic counselors responded to an on-line survey eliciting current use of electronic family history (EFH) tools and familiarity with PHR-based family history tools. Additionally, after being shown a series of screen shots of a newly developed PHR-based family history tool based on the U.S. Surgeon General's My Family Health Portrait (United States Department of Health and Human Services 2009), participants were surveyed about the perceived usefulness, ease of use, and impact on current workflow that this kind of tool would have in their practices. Eighty-three percent reported that their institution has an EMR, yet only 35 % have a dedicated space for family history. Eighty-two percent reported that less than 5 % of their patients have a PHR, and only 16 % have worked with patients who have a PHR. Seventy-two percent or more agreed that a PHR-based family history tool would facilitate communication, increase accuracy of information, ensure consistency in recording information, increase focus on actual counseling, reduce repetitive questions, improve efficiency, and increase the legibility and clarity. Our findings suggest that participants were familiar with existing EFH tools, but that the majority did not use them in practice. Genetic counselors' adoption of such tools is limited due to non-existence of this kind of technology or inability to integrate it into their clinics. They are also strongly in favor of adopting a PHR-based family history tool in genetics clinics, but have practical concerns that must be addressed before the tool can be implemented.

Clinical decision support for genetically guided personalized medicine: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To review the literature on clinical decision support (CDS) for genetically guided personalized medicine (GPM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase were searched from 1990 to 2011. The manuscripts included were summarized, and notable themes and trends were identified.

RESULTS

Following a screening of 3416 articles, 38 primary research articles were identified. Focal areas of research included family history-driven CDS, cancer management, and pharmacogenomics. Nine randomized controlled trials of CDS interventions for GPM were identified, seven of which reported positive results. The majority of manuscripts were published on or after 2007, with increased recent focus on genotype-driven CDS and the integration of CDS within primary clinical information systems.

DISCUSSION

Substantial research has been conducted to date on the use of CDS to enable GPM. In a previous analysis of CDS intervention trials, the automatic provision of CDS as a part of routine clinical workflow had been identified as being critical for CDS effectiveness. There was some indication that CDS for GPM could potentially be effective without the CDS being provided automatically, but we did not find conclusive evidence to support this hypothesis.

CONCLUSION

To maximize the clinical benefits arising from ongoing discoveries in genetics and genomics, additional research and development is recommended for identifying how best to leverage CDS to bridge the gap between the promise and realization of GPM.