Genetic Healthcare Professionals Research Articles

Prospective cohort study of genomic newborn screening: BabyScreen+ pilot study protocol

IntroductionNewborn bloodspot screening (NBS) is a highly successful public health programme that uses biochemical and other assays to screen for severe but treatable childhood-onset conditions. Introducing genomic sequencing into NBS...

Genetic counselling supervision: Luxury or necessity? A qualitative study with genetic healthcare professionals in Portugal

In recent years, there has been a significant technological evolution in the field of genetics, leading to an increase in the number of professionals working in medical genetics and, consequently, a tremendous growth in genetic counselling. At the same time, there has been a growing recognition of the parameters on which to base a safe practice, not only regarding the technical skills of the professional but also regarding their counselling skills, including relational and empathy skills and the acknowledgement of the emotional impact that genetic counselling practice can have. However, despite this growing knowledge, there are still significant differences between the various European countries, and one area where this discrepancy is particularly evident is genetic counselling supervision. Thus, if there are countries where genetic counselling supervision is not even known by the professionals, there are others where it is mandatory for practice. This research had as an objective to understand if and how genetic counselling supervision is provided in Portugal, to identify routines, challenges and impacts of genetic counselling that should be explored in a supervision process and comprehend how professionals believe supervision should be conducted to be effective. A total of sixteen medical geneticists from main Portuguese genetic services were present in two online focus groups. None of the participants had access to genetic counselling supervision as a programmed routine and there was a consensus that a service of this kind would be particularly important for the professionals as genetic counselling has frequently challenging and emotional moments. Aspects regarding clinical supervision, the characteristics of the supervisor and the practical aspects of genetic counselling supervision implementation were also mentioned during the discussions. These results highlight the relevancy of the establishment of GC supervision routines and standardized guidelines in our country, as well as a need for evidence-based research focused on its impact at professional and practice level.

P677: Perspectives of genetics healthcare professionals on direct-to-consumer genetic testing practice recommendations

P677: Perspectives of genetics healthcare professionals on direct-to-consumer genetic testing practice recommendations

Navigating the uncertainties of next-generation sequencing in the genetics clinic.

This study explores the different manifestations and navigations of uncertainty in the practice of diagnostic next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing. Drawing upon multi-sited fieldwork conducted at a large Centre for Human Genetics in Belgium, we analyse how uncertainty takes shape and is managed in the different steps of the diagnostic process: starting from the testing offer, to the analysis in the lab, the multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTs) and ending with the consultation with the patient. Building on interviews with genetic healthcare professionals and their patients and observations in consultations and MDTs, our empirical work underlines the duality of uncertainty as both burdensome and productive. Building on the existing literature on uncertainty in medicine and NGS, our analysis shows the ontological politics at play in the everyday uncertainty work in this CHG. We show how the, at times, contrasting ways of dealing with uncertainty lead to friction but also result in constructive negotiation and collaboration between actors, making use of multiple types of evidence and expertise. By not only minimising but also sustaining or inviting uncertainty, genetic healthcare professionals are able to advance the practices around NGS in a way that matches their multidisciplinary understandings, considerations and more normative stances.

EP440: Developing medical genetics interest and literacy through student interest groups: The why, the how, and the challenges

According to the American Board of Medical Genetics and Genomics, the US has slightly more than 3000 diplomats of all genetics specialties, of which there are about 1700 clinical geneticists. Additionally, the US has less than 5000 active genetic counselors. We need to increase the attention of medical students to the field of genetics since it is becoming more relevant to clinical care, especially with the expansion of personalized medicine. At minimum, all medical students and other healthcare trainees should be encouraged to attain genetic literacy, with the hopes that some of them will join the medical genetics work force. The American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) currently has 35 ACMG student interest groups (SIGs) registered. ACMG established the SIG program with the goal of expanding students’ knowledge and interest in the field of medical genetics and providing these groups support and information about careers in medical genetics. We present the combined perspectives of five institutions at varying stages of the development of medical genetics SIGs, at institutions with, or without genetics residency programs, with large and small medical school class sizes. Our objective is to share our varied experiences, including the process of establishing the SIG, student participants involved, activities hosted by the SIG, the impact that SIGs have had on students’ careers, and challenges to implementation. The process to set up a SIG begins by establishing a SIG at a host institution, followed by an ACMG application listing the nature of the group (medical or GC students, etc.), a student contact and faculty advisor. Students targeted by the SIG vary by institution, and can include medical students, medical genetics fellows, laboratory genetics and genomics fellows, genetic counseling students, undergraduate or graduate students enrolled in life sciences, or veterinary medicine, etc. Events within our respective SIGs include activities focused on increasing the visibility of genetics within the medical school, increasing knowledge of the field of medical genetics as a career, and increasing medical genetics content knowledge. Activities focused on increasing genetics visibility include film viewing-discussion groups, debates on ethical issues, discussion on direct-to-consumer genetic testing, genetic trivia game nights, journal clubs, podcast productions, and community lectures. The genetics SIGs have often partnered with other medical student SIGs at their local institutions to illustrate how genetics is pervasive in medicine. Activities focused on medical genetics careers include a “meet a genetics team”, genetics lab virtual tours, and workshops on clinical note writing and interpreting genetic test results. Activities focused on medical genetics knowledge include presentations about genetic conditions, meet the patient sessions, and collaboration on events with other genetics SIGs at other institutions. Within an institution, an active SIG can result in increased recognition of genetics as a standalone specialty with the potential to increase the number of residency applications to genetics programs. Furthermore, the presence of an active medical genetics SIG on campus results in an increased acknowledgement of the role of genetics in the care of patients from all specialties. Anecdotal evidence suggests that student engagement in SIG leadership is recognized as a desirable attribute by program directors during residency interviews. A dynamic genetics SIG depends on an active faculty advisor and a student board to create programming that enables engagement of the students in the SIG and the larger student body to increase genetics awareness. Ideally, in addition to medical students, a genetics SIG will have diverse members such as students from pre-professional (BSc) and genetic counseling (MSc) programs, laboratory genetics fellows, healthcare professionals, and other interested faculty.

The Feasibility of Implementing Mainstream Germline Genetic Testing in Routine Cancer Care-A Systematic Review.

Simple SummaryGermline genetic testing for patients with cancer can have important implications for treatment, preventive options, and for family members. In a mainstream genetic testing pathway, pre-test counseling is performed by non-genetic healthcare professionals, thereby making genetic testing more accessible to all patients who might benefit from it. These mainstream genetic testing pathways are being implemented in different hospitals around the world, and for different cancer types. It is important to evaluate how a mainstream genetic testing pathway can be made sustainable and if quality of genetic care is maintained. We show in this systematic review that it is feasible to incorporate a mainstream genetic testing pathway into routine cancer care while maintaining quality of care. A training procedure for non-genetic healthcare professionals and a close collaboration between genetics and other clinical departments are highly recommended to ensure sustainability.Background: Non-genetic healthcare professionals can provide pre-test counseling and order germline genetic tests themselves, which is called mainstream genetic testing. In this systematic review, we determined whether mainstream genetic testing was feasible in daily practice while maintaining quality of genetic care. Methods: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and PsychINFO were searched for articles describing mainstream genetic testing initiatives in cancer care. Results: Seventeen articles, reporting on 15 studies, met the inclusion criteria. Non-genetic healthcare professionals concluded that mainstream genetic testing was possible within the timeframe of a routine consultation. In 14 studies, non-genetic healthcare professionals completed some form of training about genetics. When referral was coordinated by a genetics team, the majority of patients carrying a pathogenic variant were seen for post-test counseling by genetic healthcare professionals. The number of days between cancer diagnosis and test result disclosure was always lower in the mainstream genetic testing pathway than in the standard genetic testing pathway (e.g., pre-test counseling at genetics department). Conclusions: Mainstream genetic testing seems feasible in daily practice with no insurmountable barriers. A structured pathway with a training procedure is desirable, as well as a close collaboration between genetics and other clinical departments.

DNA-based screening and personal health: a points to consider statement for individuals and health-care providers from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)

DNA-based screening and personal health: a points to consider statement for individuals and health-care providers from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG)

Maternity health care professionals' views and experiences of fetal genomic uncertainty: A review.

The field of prenatal screening and diagnosis for fetal anomalies has been marked by a rapid succession of technological advances, including most notably, chromosomal microarray analysis, and next generation sequencing. Despite the diagnostic advantages of these technologies, their incorporation into prenatal testing has created additional challenges of revealing genomic variants of unknown or uncertain significance, and secondary findings. While detailed posttest counseling about uncertain variants is best performed by medical geneticists, many of the screening and diagnostic tests that lead to this information are actually ordered by general maternity health care professionals (HCPs), such as obstetricians, midwives, and family physicians. Maternity HCPs support pregnant women through to the conclusion of their pregnancy and the postpartum period, and thus are close observers of the psychosocial impart of fetal genomic uncertainty on women and their families. While there have been many studies exploring the handling of genomic uncertainty by genetics HCPs, there has been relatively less attention paid to maternity HCPs without speciality training in genetics. This review explores the current literature surrounding nongenetic maternity HCPs' views and experiences of genomic uncertainty and returning uncertain results in the prenatal setting.

Familial disclosure by genetic healthcare professionals: a useful but sparingly used legal provision in France

Familial disclosure of genetic information is an important, long-standing ethical issue that still gives rise to much debate. In France, recent legislation has created an innovative and unprecedented procedure that...

Readiness of clinical genetic healthcare professionals to provide genomic medicine: An Australian census.

We aimed to determine capacity and readiness of Australian clinical genetic healthcare professionals to provide genomic medicine. An online survey was administered to individuals with genetic counseling or clinical genetics qualifications in Australia. Data collected included: education, certification, continuing professional development (CPD), employment, and genetic versus genomic clinical practice. Of the estimated 630 clinical genetic healthcare professionals in Australia, 354 completed the survey (56.2% response rate). Explanatory interviews were conducted with 5.5% of the genetic counselor respondents. Those working clinically reported being involved in aspects of whole exome or genome sequencing (48.6% genetic counselors, 88.6% clinical geneticists). Most genetic counselors (74.2%) and clinical geneticists (87.0%) had attended genomics CPD in the last two years, with 61.0% and 39.1% self-funding, respectively. Genetic counselors desire broad involvement in genomics, including understanding classifying and interpreting results to better counsel patients. The majority of respondents (89.9%) were satisfied with their job and 91.6% planned to work in genetics until retirement. However, 14.1% of the genetic counselors in clinical roles and 24.6% of the clinical geneticists planned to retire within 10years. This is the first national audit of clinical genetic healthcare professionals, revealing the Australian workforce is motivated and prepared to embrace new models to deliver genomic medicine but consideration of education and training is required to meet demand.

Canadian genetic healthcare professionals' attitudes towards discussing private pay options with patients.

BackgroundJust as there is inconsistency with respect to coverage of genomic testing with insurance carriers, there is interprovincial discrepancy in Canada. Consequently, the option of private pay (e.g., self pay) arises, which can lead to inequities in access, particularly when patients may not be aware of this option. There are currently no published data regarding how the Canadian genetics community handles discussions of private pay options with patients. The purpose of this study was to assess the attitudes of genetic healthcare professionals (GHPs: medical geneticists, genetic counselors, and genetic nurses) practicing in Canada toward these discussions.MethodsAn online survey was distributed to members of the Canadian College of Medical Geneticists and the Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors to assess frequencies, rationale, and ethical considerations regarding these conversations. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.ResultsOf 144 respondents, 95% reported discussing private pay and 65% reported working in a clinic without a policy on this issue. There were geographic and practice‐specific differences. The most common circumstance for these discussions was when a test was clinically indicated (e.g., but funding was denied) followed by when the patient initiated the conversation. The most frequently discussed tests included: multi‐gene panels (73% of respondents), noninvasive prenatal testing (62%), and pre‐implantation genetic diagnosis (58%). Although 65% felt it was ethical to discuss private pay, 35% indicated it was “sometimes” ethical.ConclusionWith the increasing availability of genomic technologies, these findings inform how we practice and demonstrate the need for policy in this area.

Experience Gained from the Development and Execution of a Multidisciplinary Multi-syndrome Hereditary Colon Cancer Family Conference.

Genetic healthcare professionals provide genetic cancer risk assessment and follow-up care for patients facing hereditary cancers. To meet the needs of those affected by hereditary colorectal cancer, City of Hope and the Hereditary Colon Cancer Foundation collaborated to develop a "Family Day" conference. We describe the development of our conference based upon the Hereditary Colon Cancer Foundation's "Family Day" program model, with refinements completed using the Participatory Action Research theoretical framework, which incorporated input from conference participants and researchers. Thirty-one participants attended the conference, representing patients with, or families, friends, and caregivers of those with, multiple colorectal cancer predisposition syndromes, including Lynch, familial adenomatous polyposis, and juvenile polyposis. Participants who completed the feedback surveys (n = 22) were highly satisfied with the presentation content, ranking the keynote lecture on family communication the highest of the conference events. Participants also provided feedback regarding how to improve future conferences. In conclusion, we share our experience and provide guidance for developing a successful hereditary colon cancer predisposition patient and family conference.

Adopted Individuals' Views on the Utility and Value of Expanded Carrier Screening.

Adoptees may not have family medical history and ethnicity information. Carrier screening assesses reproductive risk. Expanded carrier screening (ECS) screens for many genetic conditions regardless of a patient's knowledge of family history and ethnicity. This study aimed to better understand the opinions and attitudes of adopted individuals on the use of ECS in determining a patient's reproductive genetic risks. Specifically, the study assessed how adopted individuals feel that results of ECS may be useful to them and whether adoptees feel that meeting with a genetics professional in the process of undergoing ECS would be useful. Adult adoptees (N = 124) were recruited online. Their opinions on ECS were explored. The majority reported they had never been offered carrier screening (92%). The majority of adoptees wanted ECS (76%). Neither the amount of contact with biological relatives nor having medical knowledge about biological relatives was significantly associated with adoptees' desire to pursue ECS. There was a significant positive correlation between adoptees of higher education levels and the amount they would pay for ECS (p = 0.004). The majority of participants (95%) indicated a genetics professional would be helpful when undergoing ECS. The findings suggest this population may want ECS and support from genetics healthcare professionals. Advocacy for genetic counseling and testing for adoptees appears justifiable.

Genetic Counseling in the Era of Genomics: What's all the Fuss about?

As genomic sequencing becomes more widely available in clinical settings for diagnostic purposes, a number of genetic counseling issues are gaining precedence. The ability to manage these issues will be paramount as genetic and non-genetic healthcare professionals navigate the complexities of using genomic technologies to facilitate diagnosis and inform patient management. Counseling issues arising when counseling for diagnostic genomic sequencing were identified by four genetic counselors with 10yearsof collective experience providing genetic counseling in this setting. These issues were discussed and refined at a meeting of genetic counselors working in clinical genomics settings in Melbourne, Australia. Emerging counseling issues, or variations of established counseling issues, were identified from the issues raised. Illustrative cases were selected where pre- and post-test genetic counseling was provided in clinical settings to individuals who received singleton or trio WES with targeted analysis. Counseling issues discussed in this paper include a reappraisal of how genetic counselors manage hope in the genomic era, informed consent for secondary use of genomic data, clinical reanalysis of genomic data, unexpected or unsolicited secondary findings, and trio sequencing. The authors seek to contribute to the evolving understanding of genetic counseling for diagnostic genomic sequencing through considering the applicability of existing genetic counseling competencies to managing emerging counseling issues and discussing genetic counseling practice implications.

Communication of Information about Genetic Risks: Putting Families at the Center

Genetic information is a family affair. With the expansion of genomic technologies, many new causal genes and variants have been established and the potential for molecular diagnoses increased, with implications not only for patients but also their relatives. The need for genetic counseling and intrafamilial circulation of information on genetic risks grew accordingly. Also, the amount and, particularly, the complexity of the information to convey multiplied. Sharing information about genetic risks with family members, however, has never been an easy matter and often becomes a source of personal and familial conflicts and distress. Ethical requisites generally prevent healthcare professionals from directly contacting their consultands' relatives (affected or still at risk), who often feel unsupported throughout that process. We discuss here the communication of genetic risks to family members. We first consider genomic testing as a basis for family-centered health care, as opposed to a predominant focus on the individual. We reviewed the literature on sharing genetic risk information with family members, and the associated ethical issues for professionals. Some clinical cases are presented and discussed, and key issues for meeting the needs of individuals and families are addressed. We argue that genetic information is inextricably linked to the family and that communicating about genetic risks is a process grounded within the broader milieu of family relationships and functioning. We conclude for the need for a more family-centered approach and interventions that can promote sensitive attitudes to the provision of genetic information to and within the family, as well as its inclusion in educational and training programmes for genetic healthcare professionals.

Prenatal Testing for Adult‐Onset Conditions: the Position of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

Advances in genetic testing and the availability of such testing in pregnancy allows prospective parents to test their future child for adult-onset conditions. This ability raises several complex ethical issues. Prospective parents have reproductive rights to obtain information about their fetus. This information may or may not alter pregnancy management. These rights can be in conflict with the rights of the future individual, who will be denied the right to elect or decline testing. This paper highlights the complexity of these issues, details discussions that went into the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) Public Policy Task Force's development of the Prenatal testing for Adult-Onset Conditions position statement adopted in November 2014, and cites relevant literature on this topic through December 2015. Issues addressed include parental rights and autonomy, rights of the future child, the right not to know, possible adverse effects on childhood and the need for genetic counseling. This paper will serve as a reference to genetic counselors and healthcare professionals when faced with this situation in clinical practice.

What results to disclose, when, and who decides? Healthcare professionals' views on prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis.

ObjectivesThis study explored the views of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the UK about what information should be disclosed, when; and whether women/parents should be given a choice as to what they wish to know.MethodsQ‐methodology was used to assess the views of 40 HCPs (genetic HCPs, fetal medicine experts, lab‐scientists).ResultsMost participants agreed that variants of unknown clinical significance should not be disclosed. Participants were divided between those who considered variants of uncertain clinical significance helpful for parents and clinicians, and those who considered them harmful. Although recognising the potential disadvantages of disclosing risks for adult‐onset conditions, participants thought it would be difficult to withhold such information once identified. Participants largely supported some parental involvement in determining which results should be returned. Most participants believed that information obtained via CMA testing in pregnancy should either be disclosed during pregnancy, or not at all.ConclusionHCPs taking part in the study largely believed that variants that will inform the management of the pregnancy, or are relevant to other family members, should be reported. Recent UK guidelines, published after this research was completed, reflect these opinions. © 2016 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

From Constraints to Opportunities? Provision of Psychosocial Support in Portuguese Oncogenetic Counseling Services

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

“I want to know what's in Pandora's box”: Comparing stakeholder perspectives on incidental findings in clinical whole genomic sequencing

Whole genomic sequencing (WGS) promises significant personalized health benefits, and its increasingly low cost makes wide clinical use inevitable. However, a core challenge is "incidental findings" (IF). Using focus groups, we explored attitudes about the disclosure of IF in clinical settings from three perspectives: Genetics health-care professionals, the general public, and parents whose children have experienced genetic testing. Analysis was based on a framework approach. All three groups considered practical and ethical considerations. There was consensus that IF presented challenges for disclosure and a pre-test patient-clinician discussion was vital for clarification and agreement. The professionals favored targeted analysis to limit data handling and focus pre-test discussions on medical relevance. Their perspective highlighted ethical concepts of justice and beneficence. The lay groups' standpoint emphasized autonomy and patients' rights to choose what findings they receive, and that patients accept the consequences of any potential anxiety and uncertainty. The lay groups also felt that it was their responsibility to check genomic developments over time with their original test results and saw patient responsibility as an important part of patient choice.

Are family-oriented interventions in Portuguese genetics services a remote possibility? Professionals’ views on a multifamily intervention for cancer susceptibility families

This article examines genetics healthcare professionals' opinions about a multifamily psychoeducational programme for hereditary cancer susceptibility families, implemented at a Portuguese genetics service. Their views on how a family-oriented approach is envisioned to be incorporated in Portuguese genetic counselling services are also reported. Six focus groups and three individual interviews were undertaken comprising 30 professionals working in the provision of genetic counselling and genetic counsellor trainees. Participants were given a page-summary describing the intervention and asked to comment the strengths and limitations of the multifamily intervention. All interviews were fully transcribed and analysed using the constant comparison method. The qualitative analysis generated data comprising four thematic categories in relation to the professionals' views: (a) usefulness of the programme; (b) programme's methodological and practical obstacles; (c) genetics services constraints; and (d) suggestions for improving the programme and further family-oriented interventions. We reflect on the reported views examining the intervention, and on how current constraints of genetic services limit the provision of psychosocial support for cancer susceptibility families. The implications of these findings regarding the purpose of genetic counselling are discussed. Results may sensitise stakeholders and policy makers for the need to deliver family-based services in cancer genetic counselling, with adequate planning and collaborative involvement of different professionals.