Jianbang Chiang, Ziyang Chua, Jia Ying Chan, Ashita Ashish Sule, Wan Hsein Loke, Elaine Lum, Marcus Eng Hock Ong, Nicholas Graves, Joanne Ngeow
{"title":"改善遗传性癌症综合征级联检测实施的策略:系统综述","authors":"Jianbang Chiang, Ziyang Chua, Jia Ying Chan, Ashita Ashish Sule, Wan Hsein Loke, Elaine Lum, Marcus Eng Hock Ong, Nicholas Graves, Joanne Ngeow","doi":"10.1038/s41525-024-00412-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Hereditary cancer syndromes constitute approximately 10% of all cancers. Cascade testing involves testing of at-risk relatives to determine if they carry the familial pathogenic variant. Despite growing efforts targeted at improving cascade testing uptake, current literature continues to reflect poor rates of uptake, typically below 30%. This study aims to systematically review current literature on intervention strategies to improve cascade testing, assess the quality of intervention descriptions and evaluate the implementation outcomes of listed interventions. We searched major databases using keywords and subject heading of “cascade testing”. Interventions proposed in each study were classified according to the Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) taxonomy. Quality of intervention description was assessed using the TIDieR checklist, and evaluation of implementation outcomes was performed using Proctor’s Implementation Outcomes Framework. Improvements in rates of genetic testing uptake was seen in interventions across the different EPOC taxonomy strategies. The average TIDieR score was 7.3 out of 12. Items least reported include modifications (18.5%), plans to assess fidelity/adherence (7.4%) and actual assessment of fidelity/adherence (7.4%). An average of 2.9 out of 8 aspects of implementation outcomes were examined. The most poorly reported outcomes were cost, fidelity and sustainability, with only 3.7% of studies reporting them. Most interventions have demonstrated success in improving cascade testing uptake. Uptake of cascade testing was highest with delivery arrangement (68%). However, the quality of description of interventions and assessment of implementation outcomes are often suboptimal, hindering their replication and implementation downstream. Therefore, further adoption of standardized guidelines in reporting of interventions and formal assessment of implementation outcomes may help promote translation of these interventions into routine practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":19273,"journal":{"name":"NPJ Genomic Medicine","volume":"165 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Strategies to improve implementation of cascade testing in hereditary cancer syndromes: a systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Jianbang Chiang, Ziyang Chua, Jia Ying Chan, Ashita Ashish Sule, Wan Hsein Loke, Elaine Lum, Marcus Eng Hock Ong, Nicholas Graves, Joanne Ngeow\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41525-024-00412-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Hereditary cancer syndromes constitute approximately 10% of all cancers. Cascade testing involves testing of at-risk relatives to determine if they carry the familial pathogenic variant. Despite growing efforts targeted at improving cascade testing uptake, current literature continues to reflect poor rates of uptake, typically below 30%. This study aims to systematically review current literature on intervention strategies to improve cascade testing, assess the quality of intervention descriptions and evaluate the implementation outcomes of listed interventions. We searched major databases using keywords and subject heading of “cascade testing”. Interventions proposed in each study were classified according to the Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) taxonomy. Quality of intervention description was assessed using the TIDieR checklist, and evaluation of implementation outcomes was performed using Proctor’s Implementation Outcomes Framework. Improvements in rates of genetic testing uptake was seen in interventions across the different EPOC taxonomy strategies. The average TIDieR score was 7.3 out of 12. Items least reported include modifications (18.5%), plans to assess fidelity/adherence (7.4%) and actual assessment of fidelity/adherence (7.4%). An average of 2.9 out of 8 aspects of implementation outcomes were examined. The most poorly reported outcomes were cost, fidelity and sustainability, with only 3.7% of studies reporting them. Most interventions have demonstrated success in improving cascade testing uptake. Uptake of cascade testing was highest with delivery arrangement (68%). However, the quality of description of interventions and assessment of implementation outcomes are often suboptimal, hindering their replication and implementation downstream. Therefore, further adoption of standardized guidelines in reporting of interventions and formal assessment of implementation outcomes may help promote translation of these interventions into routine practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19273,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NPJ Genomic Medicine\",\"volume\":\"165 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NPJ Genomic Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41525-024-00412-0\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NPJ Genomic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41525-024-00412-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Strategies to improve implementation of cascade testing in hereditary cancer syndromes: a systematic review
Hereditary cancer syndromes constitute approximately 10% of all cancers. Cascade testing involves testing of at-risk relatives to determine if they carry the familial pathogenic variant. Despite growing efforts targeted at improving cascade testing uptake, current literature continues to reflect poor rates of uptake, typically below 30%. This study aims to systematically review current literature on intervention strategies to improve cascade testing, assess the quality of intervention descriptions and evaluate the implementation outcomes of listed interventions. We searched major databases using keywords and subject heading of “cascade testing”. Interventions proposed in each study were classified according to the Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) taxonomy. Quality of intervention description was assessed using the TIDieR checklist, and evaluation of implementation outcomes was performed using Proctor’s Implementation Outcomes Framework. Improvements in rates of genetic testing uptake was seen in interventions across the different EPOC taxonomy strategies. The average TIDieR score was 7.3 out of 12. Items least reported include modifications (18.5%), plans to assess fidelity/adherence (7.4%) and actual assessment of fidelity/adherence (7.4%). An average of 2.9 out of 8 aspects of implementation outcomes were examined. The most poorly reported outcomes were cost, fidelity and sustainability, with only 3.7% of studies reporting them. Most interventions have demonstrated success in improving cascade testing uptake. Uptake of cascade testing was highest with delivery arrangement (68%). However, the quality of description of interventions and assessment of implementation outcomes are often suboptimal, hindering their replication and implementation downstream. Therefore, further adoption of standardized guidelines in reporting of interventions and formal assessment of implementation outcomes may help promote translation of these interventions into routine practice.
NPJ Genomic MedicineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Molecular Biology
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
1.90%
发文量
67
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊介绍:
npj Genomic Medicine is an international, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to publishing the most important scientific advances in all aspects of genomics and its application in the practice of medicine.
The journal defines genomic medicine as "diagnosis, prognosis, prevention and/or treatment of disease and disorders of the mind and body, using approaches informed or enabled by knowledge of the genome and the molecules it encodes." Relevant and high-impact papers that encompass studies of individuals, families, or populations are considered for publication. An emphasis will include coupling detailed phenotype and genome sequencing information, both enabled by new technologies and informatics, to delineate the underlying aetiology of disease. Clinical recommendations and/or guidelines of how that data should be used in the clinical management of those patients in the study, and others, are also encouraged.