Journal of Genetic Counseling最新文献

The process of identifying and responding to patients' social, emotional, and psychological concerns is a required skill for training and practicing genetic counselors. Patients' health outcomes are improved when genetic counselors attend to these "psychosocial" concerns. Still, the process of eliciting, assessing, and attending to patients' psychosocial concerns in the genetic counseling setting is not well defined in the literature nor is it performed consistently. Tools that do exist are often questionnaire-based, designed for research use, or occur outside of a genetic counseling appointment. Here we describe the complexities of defining "psychosocial assessment" in genetic counseling, its impact on patient outcomes, and summarize existing tools for psychosocial assessment. We identify a need for evidenced-based, verbally-administered psychosocial assessment tools in genetic counseling and explore the value of adapting an existing tool from primary care (the BATHE method) to genetic counseling. The BATHE method is a semi-structured psychosocial assessment tool that can be performed quickly within a patient appointment to gather context, emotional impact, the patient's primary concern, and coping strategies. Through our professional experiences we believe it is a beneficial psychosocial assessment tool as perceived by both patients and genetic counselors. Further work is needed to determine if the BATHE method could fill a gap in how genetic counselors conduct a psychosocial assessment.

In 2019, the Medical University of Innsbruck introduced the first Genetic and Genomic Counseling master's program in the German-speaking countries. A major challenge of this process was the absence of practicing Genetic Counselors (GC) in these countries, leading to a lack of experience with GCs in medical genetic services and the absence of a legal framework for the profession. Consequently, student placements within the program commenced with neither the students nor their supervising consultants having any previous experience of collaborative teamwork between clinical geneticists and GCs. To share insights from the initial implementation phase, supervising consultants from the seven student placement institutes were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews guided by open-ended questions. From these interviews, three models of interprofessional teamwork between GCs and clinical geneticists emerged: (1) the alternating or tandem model, (2) qualified preliminary and follow-up patient interviews, and (3) the provision of genetic (counseling) services without genetic counseling in the legal sense. In addition, the interviewees provided recommendations for addressing legal concerns and for the effective establishment of appropriate compensation structures for GCs within the German-speaking countries. Clinical geneticists taking part in the study estimated that the integration of GCs could potentially enhance their counseling capacity by as much as 50%. Importantly, they did not foresee any reduction in counseling quality caused by the inclusion of GCs. This study provides evidence that the GC profession can provide additional skills to human genetic services and positively impact both patient support and overall capacity of genetic services also in the German-speaking countries.

The purpose of the current study was to assess parent perceptions and experiences of genetic testing, as well as barriers for not undergoing testing in a sample of families of children with hearing loss. A 44-item questionnaire, The Parent Perception of Genetic Testing Questionnaire developed by the research study team was administered. Participants were recruited from a pediatric otolaryngology/audiology practice and social media. A total of 146 parents of children with hearing loss participated. Approximately 47.6% of the children in our sample underwent genetic testing, 44.8% did not, and 7.6% of parents were unsure. For those that did not undergo testing, reasons included: unaware (6.2%), not interested (8.9%), cost (8.9%), time (3.4%), fearful of results (2.7%), and never offered (15.1%). For those that did undergo testing, over half of the parents reported that they did not receive counseling before (55.1%) and 41.7% reported they received counseling after the testing. Furthermore, parents were confused about the results with 18.3% reporting they were Very Confused, 28.3% Somewhat Confused, 20% A Little Confused, and 33.3% Not Confused at All about the variant of uncertain or unknown significance. Notably, less than half of parents (43.4%) remembered what they were told about the mode of inheritance. Overall, our study highlighted the low adoption rate of genetic testing and lack of integration into standard of care for otology/audiology practices. Collaboration between hearing healthcare professionals and geneticists is warranted to determine how to reduce barriers to access while improving pre- and post-counseling.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a common hereditary condition affecting approximately 1 in 500 adults. It is characterized by marked clinical heterogeneity with individuals experiencing minimal to no symptoms, while others may have more severe outcomes including heart failure and sudden cardiac death. Genetic testing for HCM is increasingly available due to advances in DNA sequencing technologies and reduced costs. While a diagnosis of HCM is a well-supported indication for genetic testing and genetic counseling, incorporation of genetic services into the clinical setting is often limited outside of expert centers. As genetic counseling and testing have become more accessible and convenient, optimal integration of genomic data into the clinical care of individuals with HCM should be instituted, including delivery via genetic counseling. Drawing on recommendations from recent disease guidelines and systematic evidence reviews, we highlight key recommendations for HCM genetic testing and counseling. This practice resource provides a comprehensive framework to guide healthcare providers in the process of genetic test selection, variant classification, and cascade testing for genetic evaluation of HCM.

As indications for hereditary cancer genetic testing (GT) for patients with breast cancer (BC) expand, breast surgery teams offer GT to newly diagnosed patients to inform surgical plans. There is, however, limited data on the experiences of patients undergoing cancer GT by non-genetic providers. This study used in-depth interviews with 21 women recently diagnosed with BC at a large academic health system to capture their experiences. Post-positivist codebook thematic analysis was used to identify major themes from the interviews. Participants reported an overall positive experience of this GT process, stating that they prefer GT at an existing appointment shortly after their diagnosis, even though they described the conversation as brief. Many participants indicated thinking about or desiring GT before the offer was made. Interestingly, most participants did not see surgical decision-making as the main reason for GT and were instead motivated by concern for relatives and to have complete information. Interview data indicated areas for improvement in patient-provider communication, and most participants agreed that additional reference information on GT in the form of written or video materials would be helpful. Offering GT at an initial breast surgery appointment is acceptable and desired by patients with a new BC diagnosis and should be considered as a way to increase access to GT for these patients. However, additional information for patients is needed to close gaps in communication and provide a trustworthy reference following a busy medical appointment.

Genomic sequencing has been proposed as a strategy to expand newborn screening. Perspectives on genomic newborn screening from parents of diverse racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds are needed to shape equitable implementation of this modality. We conducted 20 semi-structured interviews (15 English, 5 Spanish) and seven focus groups (4 English, 3 Spanish) with parents from diverse backgrounds to assess their perspectives regarding which disorders and variants might be screened, data privacy, and barriers to pursuing specialized care. Parents felt that genomic newborn screening would provide them with improved understanding of their children's health and had the potential to yield health and personal benefits. Themes that became evident included: interest in childhood and family health risks, the value of emotional preparation and personal planning, understanding of uncertain and low-risk results, concerns regarding data privacy, and concerns about support following the receipt of a positive newborn screening result. The expected benefits and concerns expressed by parents of diverse backgrounds regarding genomic newborn screening should guide future policy decisions. Their preferences should be considered prior to the implementation of large-scale genomic newborn screening programs.

The perceived personal control (PPC) questionnaire serves as an instrument to assess the concept of PPC, which refers to a person's perception of their ability to achieve positive outcomes while avoiding the negative effects of a given situation. Developed and used as a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) in genetic counseling, the PPC questionnaire has been translated and validated in several languages, but not in French. The aim of this study was to cross-culturally adapt and validate a French version of the PPC questionnaire to evaluate genetic counseling services for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). After the translation into French, cognitive interviews were conducted with nine participants who had attended genetic counseling for HBOC to examine the adequacy of this French version and to verify participants' understanding of the questionnaire items. Cognitive interview data suggested that slight modifications should be made to four of the nine items and that it would be beneficial to add a short introduction to ensure that participants' interpretation corresponded to the intended meaning. Psychometric validation was then conducted with 99 participants who had also attended genetic counseling for HBOC. Counselees completed the questionnaire before and after their genetic consultation. The acceptability of the questionnaire was demonstrated by the presence of few missing items. The original three-factor solution was not confirmed by our exploratory factor analysis, suggesting that the questionnaire should be used as a one-dimensional instrument. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was high, with Cronbach's alpha of 0.89 before genetic counseling and 0.88 after. The significant increase in PPC scores before and after genetic counseling supports the responsiveness of the questionnaire. Convergent validity was confirmed by positive association with counselees' satisfaction with genetic counseling. These properties suggest the French PPC questionnaire is a valuable instrument for use as a PROM in genetic counseling research.

Some genetic counselors (GCs) may find theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) useful in clinical skills selection and when reflecting on or evaluating genetic counseling practice. This paper aims to demonstrate how TMFs can be used to postulate how different skills may impact patients'/clients' decisions, behaviors, and outcomes and consider how multiple TMFs can inform the use of various skills or strategies to achieve different goals. Additionally, we provide examples of TMFs that may help GCs in nonclinical aspects of their work, such as implementing and evaluating new interventions or service delivery models. To guide the selection of appropriate TMFs, we provide a set of questions to consider and include examples of skills and approaches that align with different TMFs. While TMFs provide a structured approach and valuable guidance that may help advance genetic counseling practice, they have certain limitations. Additional research is necessary to determine the effectiveness of using TMFs to guide clinical practice and improve patient/client outcomes.

Pakistan with a population of approximately 200 million people faces a significant burden of genetic disorders. Higher preference for consanguinity (73%) is one of the significant reasons. Despite being a hub for rare genetic disorders, the country lacks professionally trained genetic counselors due to the absence of postgraduate degree programs or diplomas in genetic counseling. This shortage of specialized personnel results in inadequate and limited genetic counseling practices nationwide. This study aimed to highlight the urgent need for genetic counseling in Pakistan, focusing on the gaps within both society and the healthcare infrastructure. A survey-based study involving n = 101 participants was conducted to assess the demand for genetic counseling among medical professionals in Lahore, Pakistan. The study targeted five categories of medical specialists-gynecologists, oncologists, psychiatrists, pediatricians, and ultrasonologists-working in both private and public healthcare settings in Lahore. The survey included a questionnaire covering demographic information, 10 general questions, and a case study with follow-up questions. The survey was conducted both online and through in-person visits. Our findings reveal a significant lack of awareness among healthcare providers, with 91.1% of respondents unaware of any genetic counseling services or genetic counselors in Lahore. The research underscores the crucial role of genetic counselors, with the vast majority (99%) of specialists expressing an urgent need for their presence in Pakistan's healthcare system. This study highlights that only qualified genetic counselors can effectively address genetic issues. Furthermore, it advocates for the introduction of specialized professional training programs to address this pressing need in the country.

In Korea, genetic counseling services began with the opening of genetic clinics in the early 1990s; in recent years, demand for these services has increased. However, genetic counseling is not an officially recognized healthcare service under the Korean national health insurance system; further, its certification is not recognized as a medical qualification. To clarify the role and significance of genetic counselors, this study examined their field experiences. To this end, we conducted focus group interviews with 11 certified genetic counselors, six advanced practice nurses, and four regular nurses. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and examined using thematic analysis. We found that even though Korea did not recognize their roles, the participants met their responsibilities and primary duties. In addition, they faced challenges during counseling due to a lack of formal education in genetics and genomics. Moreover, they encountered dilemmas related to the legal and ethical aspects of decision support for family testing or prenatal diagnosis due to the complexity of rare genetic disorders. However, they attempted to acquire the specialized knowledge needed to support patients with rare genetic disorders and their families, gradually developing practical experience and specialized knowledge. Therefore, it is necessary to develop manuals, establish systems, and improve working environments to provide high-quality and specialized genetic counseling. Additionally, there is a need for national support, such as establishing set wages for genetic counselors, developing a national qualification certification system, and securing dedicated personnel.