Health professionals contacting patients’ relatives directly about genetic risk (with patient consent): current clinical practice and perspectives

IF 4.6 2区 生物学 Q2 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY European Journal of Human Genetics Pub Date : 2024-12-19 DOI:10.1038/s41431-024-01730-8
Ami Stott, Evanthia O. Madelli, Tiffany Boughtwood, Kristen J. Nowak, Margaret Otlowski, Jane Tiller
{"title":"Health professionals contacting patients’ relatives directly about genetic risk (with patient consent): current clinical practice and perspectives","authors":"Ami Stott, Evanthia O. Madelli, Tiffany Boughtwood, Kristen J. Nowak, Margaret Otlowski, Jane Tiller","doi":"10.1038/s41431-024-01730-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Genetic testing can provide risk information to individuals and their blood relatives. Cascade testing uptake by at-risk relatives is <50%, with suboptimal family communication a key barrier to risk notification. The practice of health professionals (HPs) directly contacting relatives (with patient consent) to assist with risk notification has significant international support, but little is known about the practices and views of HPs in Australia. We surveyed Australian clinical genetics and laboratory services (public and private) which offer genetic testing of relevance to relatives, about current practices and views. Of 104 services invited, 78 responded to our online survey (75.0% response rate; clinical n = 59/81; laboratory n = 19/23). Most clinical services (83.3%) agreed it would be beneficial to contact at-risk relatives directly. However, the majority (80.4%) do not routinely contact relatives directly, with inadequate resources (80.0%) and privacy concerns (62.2%) cited as primary reasons. If direct contact methods were used, most clinical services (65.4%) prefer a letter which includes specific information about the genetic condition. Most clinical (86.5%) and laboratory (88.2%) services saw benefit in the development of a national clinical guideline for HPs regarding direct contact. This study confirms that most clinical genetics services would see benefits to being able to assist patients by contacting relatives directly about their potential genetic risk. Our findings highlight the need for a national clinical guideline clarifying HPs’ legal and privacy obligations, and provide an opportunity for clinical services to reconsider their allocation of resources to prioritise assisting patients with risk notification.","PeriodicalId":12016,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Human Genetics","volume":"33 4","pages":"476-484"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41431-024-01730-8.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Human Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41431-024-01730-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Genetic testing can provide risk information to individuals and their blood relatives. Cascade testing uptake by at-risk relatives is <50%, with suboptimal family communication a key barrier to risk notification. The practice of health professionals (HPs) directly contacting relatives (with patient consent) to assist with risk notification has significant international support, but little is known about the practices and views of HPs in Australia. We surveyed Australian clinical genetics and laboratory services (public and private) which offer genetic testing of relevance to relatives, about current practices and views. Of 104 services invited, 78 responded to our online survey (75.0% response rate; clinical n = 59/81; laboratory n = 19/23). Most clinical services (83.3%) agreed it would be beneficial to contact at-risk relatives directly. However, the majority (80.4%) do not routinely contact relatives directly, with inadequate resources (80.0%) and privacy concerns (62.2%) cited as primary reasons. If direct contact methods were used, most clinical services (65.4%) prefer a letter which includes specific information about the genetic condition. Most clinical (86.5%) and laboratory (88.2%) services saw benefit in the development of a national clinical guideline for HPs regarding direct contact. This study confirms that most clinical genetics services would see benefits to being able to assist patients by contacting relatives directly about their potential genetic risk. Our findings highlight the need for a national clinical guideline clarifying HPs’ legal and privacy obligations, and provide an opportunity for clinical services to reconsider their allocation of resources to prioritise assisting patients with risk notification.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
卫生专业人员直接与患者亲属联系遗传风险(征得患者同意):目前的临床实践和观点。
基因检测可以为个人及其血亲提供风险信息。级联试验对高危亲属的吸收是
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Human Genetics
European Journal of Human Genetics 生物-生化与分子生物学
CiteScore
9.90
自引率
5.80%
发文量
216
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Human Genetics is the official journal of the European Society of Human Genetics, publishing high-quality, original research papers, short reports and reviews in the rapidly expanding field of human genetics and genomics. It covers molecular, clinical and cytogenetics, interfacing between advanced biomedical research and the clinician, and bridging the great diversity of facilities, resources and viewpoints in the genetics community. Key areas include: -Monogenic and multifactorial disorders -Development and malformation -Hereditary cancer -Medical Genomics -Gene mapping and functional studies -Genotype-phenotype correlations -Genetic variation and genome diversity -Statistical and computational genetics -Bioinformatics -Advances in diagnostics -Therapy and prevention -Animal models -Genetic services -Community genetics
期刊最新文献
Personalised genomic approaches across the whole journey "Where do I go from here?" Navigating a lifelong road without a map: the care experiences of hereditary cancer patients. Correction: Performance of different polygenic risk scores for breast cancer risk prediction: in-depth evaluations across large UK and Australian cohorts. From targeted to genome-wide DNA testing in public health screening programs-an introduction to the special issue of the European Journal of Human Genetics. Non-coding genome in nail-patella syndrome: Genetic diagnosis as a guide for personalized follow-up.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1