Genetics providers' perspectives on the use of digital tools in clinical practice

PURPOSE

Digital tools are increasingly incorporated into genetics practice to address challenges with the current model of care. Yet, genetics providers' perspectives on digital tool use are not well characterized.

METHODS

Genetics providers across Canada were recruited. Semistructured interviews were conducted to ascertain their perspectives on digital tool use and the clinical practice factors that might inform digital tool integration. A qualitative interpretive description approach was used for analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-three genetics providers across 5 provinces were interviewed. Participants had favorable attitudes toward digital tool use. They were open to using digital tools in the pretest phase of the genetic testing pathway and for some posttest tasks or in a hybrid model of care. Participants expressed that digital tools could enhance efficiency and allow providers to spend more time practicing at the top of scope. Providers also described the need for careful consideration of the potential impact of digitalization on the clinician-patient dynamic, access to and equity of care, and unintended digital burden on providers.

CONCLUSION

Genetics providers considered digital tools to represent a viable solution for improving access, efficiency, and quality of care in genetics practice. Successful use of digital tools in practice will require careful consideration of their potential unintended impacts.

The ENGAGE study: a 3-arm randomized hybrid type 1 effectiveness and implementation study of an in-home, collaborative PCP model of remote telegenetic services to increase uptake of cancer genetic services in childhood cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Germline cancer genetic testing has become a standard evidence-based practice, with established risk reduction and screening guidelines for genetic carriers. Access to genetic services is limited in many places, which leaves many genetic carriers unidentified and at risk for late diagnosis of cancers and poor outcomes. This poses a problem for childhood cancer survivors, as this is a population with an increased risk for subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMN) due to cancer therapy or inherited cancer predisposition. The ENGaging and Activating cancer survivors in Genetic services (ENGAGE) study evaluates the effectiveness of an in-home, collaborative PCP model of remote telegenetic services to increase uptake of cancer genetic testing in childhood cancer survivors compared to usual care options for genetic testing.

METHODS

The ENGAGE study is a 3-arm randomized hybrid type 1 effectiveness and implementation study within the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study population which tests a clinical intervention while gathering information on its delivery during the effectiveness trial and its potential for future implementation among 360 participants. Participants are randomized into three arms. Those randomized to Arm A receive genetic services via videoconferencing, those in Arm B receive these services by phone, and those randomized to Arm C will receive usual care services.

DISCUSSION

With many barriers to accessing genetic services, innovative delivery models are needed to address this gap and increase uptake of genetic services. The ENGAGE study evaluates the effectiveness of an adapted model of remote delivery of genetic services to increase the uptake of recommended genetic testing in childhood cancer survivors. This study assesses the uptake in remote genetic services and identify barriers to uptake to inform future recommendations and a theoretically-informed process evaluation which can inform modifications to enhance dissemination beyond this study population and to realize the benefits of precision medicine.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This protocol was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04455698) on July 2, 2020.

Genetic services survey-experience of people with rare diseases and their families accessing genetic services in the Irish Republic

Irish Health Service objectives state that patients with rare diseases should have timely access to genomic diagnostics with appropriate pre and post-test counselling. However, waiting times for clinical genetics outpatient appointments, during the study period, were up to two years as staffing levels remain low. A targeted public online survey was conducted in January 2022 to capture the experiences of Rare Disease families trying to access genetic testing and clinical genetic clinics in the Irish Republic. Irish patients experience significant waiting times to access clinical genetic services and self-report anxiety and stress, related to delayed access to diagnosis, clarity around recurrence risk and follow-up management. This negatively impacts personal decisions around family planning, education and employment and has a significant impact on family members seeking clarity on their own risk. Mainstream genetic testing activity is significant. Families report concern over the competency of health care professionals arranging and delivering genetic results and delays in accessing clinical genetics expertise to take them through the clinical implications. Timely access to clinical genetics expertise is important to ensure families with rare diseases have an appropriate understanding of the medical and reproductive implications of a genetic diagnosis and access to relevant care pathways. A national framework to develop competency in genomic literacy for health-care professionals including a national genetic test directory may be beneficial. Clinical genetics teams require ongoing support and investment to ensure the delivery of a safe and effective service for Irish families with rare diseases.

Digital interventions for genomics and genetics education, empowerment, and service engagement: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Patient-facing digital technologies may reduce barriers to and alleviate the burden on genetics services. However, no work has synthesised the evidence for patient-facing digital interventions for genomics/genetics education and empowerment, or to facilitate service engagement more broadly. It is also unclear which groups have been engaged by digital interventions.

AIM

This systematic review explores which existing patient-facing digital technologies have been used for genomics/genetics education and empowerment, or to facilitate service engagement, and for whom and for which purposes the interventions have been developed.

METHODS

The review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eight databases were searched for literature. Information was extracted into an Excel sheet and analysed in a narrative manner. Quality assessments were conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies were included, of which 21 were moderate or high quality. The majority (88%) were conducted in the United States of America or within a clinical setting (79%). More than half (63%) of the interventions were web-based tools, and almost all focussed on educating users (92%). There were promising results regarding educating patients and their families and facilitating engagement with genetics services. Few of the studies focussed on empowering patients or were community-based.

CONCLUSION

Digital interventions may be used to deliver information about genetics concepts and conditions, and positively impact service engagement. However, there is insufficient evidence related to empowering patients and engaging underserved communities or consanguineous couples. Future work should focus on co-developing content with end users and incorporating interactive features.

Evaluating cancer genetic services in a safety net system: overcoming barriers for a lasting impact beyond the CHARM research project

Underserved patients face substantial barriers to receiving cancer genetic services. The Cancer Health Assessments Reaching Many (CHARM) study evaluated ways to increase access to genetic testing for individuals in underserved populations at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes (HCS). Here, we report the successful implementation of CHARM in a low-resource environment and the development of sustainable processes to continue genetic risk assessment in this setting. The research team involved key clinical personnel and patient advisors at Denver Health to provide input on study methods and materials. Through iterative and collaborative stakeholder engagement, the team identified barriers and developed solutions that would both facilitate participation in CHARM and be feasible to implement and sustain long term in clinical care. With a focus on infrastructure building, educational modules were developed to increase awareness among referring providers, and standard methods of identifying and managing HCS patients were implemented in the electronic medical record. Three hundred sixty-four DH patients successfully completed the risk assessment tool within the study, and we observed a sustained increase in referrals to genetics for HCS (from 179 in 2017 to 427 in 2021 post-intervention). Implementation of the CHARM study at a low-resourced safety net health system resulted in sustainable improvements in access to cancer genetic risk assessment and services that continue even after the study ended.Trial registration NCT03426878.

Retrospective file review shows limited genetic services fails most patients - an argument for the implementation of exome sequencing as a first-tier test in resource-constraint settings

BACKGROUND

Exome sequencing is recommended as a first-line investigation for patients with a developmental delay or intellectual disability. This approach has not been implemented in most resource-constraint settings, including Africa, due to the high cost of implementation. Instead, patients have limited access to services and testing options. Here, we evaluate the effectiveness of a limited genetic testing strategy and contrast the findings to a conceivable outcome if exome sequencing were available instead.

RESULTS

A retrospective audit of 934 patient files presenting to a medical genetics clinic in South Africa showed that 83% of patients presented with developmental delay as a clinical feature. Patients could be divided into three groups, representing distinct diagnostic pathways. Patient Group A (18%; mean test cost $131) were confirmed with aneuploidies, following a simple, inexpensive test. Patient Group B (25%; mean test cost $140) presented with clinically recognizable conditions but only 39% received a genetic diagnostic confirmation due to limited testing options. Patient Group C - the largest group (57%; mean test cost $337) - presented with heterogenous conditions and DD, and 92% remained undiagnosed after limited available testing was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with DD are the largest group of patients seen in medical genetics clinics in South Africa. When clinical features are not distinct, limited testing options drastically restricts diagnostic yield. A cost- and time analysis shows most patients would benefit from first-line exome sequencing, reducing their individual diagnostic odysseys.

Physicians' experience, practice and education, on genetic testing and genetic counseling: a nationwide survey study in Greece

Genetic testing has been implemented in clinical practice. However, data on physician's practices and education related to cancer genetics, risk assessment and clinical management in Greece, is limited. In Greece, genetic counseling is performed by treating physicians in collaboration with clinical laboratory geneticists due to the absence of medical geneticists and genetic counsellors. We evaluated treating physicians' experience on genetic testing for hereditary cancer and counseling practices in Greece, thus providing critical areas for improvement of genetic counseling processes. A 28-question survey was used to assess physicians' experience with genetic testing practices, factors that affect their clinical management and decision making and limitations in their education. Of 250 physicians, 208 (83%) completed the survey; of whom 89 (42.8%) were medical oncologists, 88 general surgeons (42.3%), 26 gynecologists (12.5%) and 5 (2.4%) of other specialties. Overall, 91.8% of participants referred patients for genetic testing, with 51.8% recommending multigene panel testing. While most clinicians (84%) reported lack of a clinical genetics department at their institution, 75.7% referred patients for genetic counseling at available departments or healthcare professionals with expertise in genetic counseling. Overall, 68.8% of respondents reported no training or moderate training on cancer genetics. A higher proportion of medical oncologists reported sufficient/very satisfactory training (40.9%) compared to general surgeons (27.3%) or gynecologists (11.5%) (p = 0.012). Time spent on pre- and post-testing sessions varied significantly among respondents. Of 199 physicians, 70% would manage patients with BRCA1 VUS as patients with pathogenic variants, mainly surgeons (83.1%) and gynecologists (80%), compared to oncologists (52.3%) (p < 0.001). Additionally, 64% of physicians treating patients with breast and ovarian cancer would recommend an intervention based on the presence of a BRCA1 VUS. Most respondents (87%) were interested in receiving additional education on cancer risk assessment. Limited consensus was observed during physicians' genetic testing, counseling practices and clinical management of patients with increased predisposition to cancer. Our findings highlight the need for improvement in physician education on cancer risk assessment and increase of genetic counseling resources and services.

Co-designing models for the communication of genomic results for rare diseases: a comparative study in the Czech Republic and the United Kingdom

The communication of genomic results to patients and families with rare diseases raise distinctive challenges. However, there is little evidence about optimal methods to communicate results to this group of service users. To address this gap, we worked with rare disease families and health professionals from two genetic/genomic services, one in the United Kingdom and one in the Czech Republic, to co-design that best meet their needs. Using the participatory methodology of Experience-Based Co-Design (EBCD), we conducted observations of clinical appointments (n=49) and interviews with family participants (n=23) and health professionals (n=22) to gather their experience of sharing/receiving results. The findings informed a facilitated co-design process, comprising 3 feedback events at each site and a series of meetings and remote consultations. Participants identified a total of four areas of current service models in need of improvement, and co-designed six prototypes of quality improvement interventions. The main finding was the identification of post-test care as the shared priority for improvement for both health professionals and families at the two sites. Our findings indicate the need to strengthen the link between diagnostics (whether or not a pathogenic variant is found) and post-test care, including psychosocial and community support. This raises implications for the reconfigurations of genomic service models, the redefinition of professional roles and responsibilities and the involvement of rare disease patients and families in health care research.

Current Issues, Challenges, and Future Perspectives of Genetic Counseling in Korea

Genetic testing has become increasingly integrated into all areas of healthcare, and complex genetic testing usage continues to grow; thus, the demand for genetic counseling (GC) is likely to increase. However, it is unclear whether the current clinical GC capacity is sufficient for meeting the existing demand. This review describes the current issues, challenges, and future perspectives of GC in Korea based on a professional survey conducted among laboratory physicians. In view of the growing GC demand in the clinical setting, participants expressed a concern about the lack of support from the national healthcare insurance policy and legal requirements, such as certification, for GC practice. The implementation of genetic testing in the overall healthcare system in Korea is in an early phase. Proper implementation can be achieved through education and training of specialists, collaboration among healthcare personnel, proper regulatory oversight, genomic policies, and public awareness. Understanding the current GC capacity, issues, and challenges is a prerequisite for effective strategic planning by healthcare systems considering the expected growth in the demand for clinical genetic services over the next few decades.

Telegenetics: The experience of an Indian center (Centre for Human Genetics) during the COVID-19 pandemic

Because of the lockdowns and restrictions placed on non‐emergency medical services due to the COVID‐19 pandemic, we were prompted to set up telegenetic services for patients and families with genetic disorders. Genetic medicine poses special challenges because the unit of consultation and counseling is often the family and not just the individual. We describe here our experience over eight months in 2020 in evaluating 539 families with genetic disorders on a virtual platform. Patients from urban and rural districts of Karnataka and neighboring states received telegenetic consultation. Families were phoned by genetic counselors 14–28 days after the initial consultation to measure feedback. One member of each family was invited to complete a modified 9‐item Telehealth Satisfaction Scale (TeSS scale). Of 293 respondents, approximately 87.3% reported satisfaction with the visual and audio quality of online contact and 86.7% on saving travel time and expenses. A shorter waiting time for appointments as compared to in‐person appointments in the previous year was seen in approximately 90%. Nearly 87% reported satisfaction with online genetic consultation; however, 74% of these indicated a preference for a face‐to‐face appointment. The reasons for this included a cultural perception of confidence instilled by meeting medical specialists in person. Telegenetics presents unusual advantages in India because of the high usage of smartphones, unlimited Internet data as a feature of most Internet plans, free web‐based video applications, and digital payments. We suggest that telegenetics may be an alternative in providing a hybrid model of care in non‐emergency situations especially where resources are limited.

Opportunities and barriers for genetic service delivery in Kenya from a health personnel perspective

Genetic counselling and testing are essential health services for the management of heritable diseases. However, in low-and-middle income countries like Kenya, genetic counsellors are not yet a licenced profession, and there is limited availability of and access to genetic testing. This study aimed to uncover opportunities and barriers for genetic service delivery in the Kenyan healthcare system from the perspectives of those who provide genetic testing and/or genetic counselling. Participants included Kenyan health personnel who deliver genetic services. This was a qualitative study that collected data via semi-structured one-on-one interviews and analyzed it using inductive thematic analysis. Participant demographics and characteristics of clinical genetic service provision were collected using a survey and results summarized using descriptive statistics. Themes revealed during analysis were compared to the clinical characteristics of genetic service provision to inform the opportunities and barriers. Fifteen interviews were conducted in total. Thematic analysis indicated that participants believed that the barriers facing genetic service delivery were linked to three themes: (1) education and training, (2) costs, and (3) counselling challenges. The opportunities for genetic service delivery were linked to four themes: (1) demand, (2) education and training, (3) encouraging a multidisciplinary approach to care, and (4) enhancing laboratory infrastructure. These findings are crucial for the development of a national evidence-informed and culturally appropriate model for genetic service delivery.

Congenital disorders and community genetic services in Nigeria: A systematic review

Nigeria has a large number of congenital disorders (CD). For instance, two out of every hundred children born in Nigeria have sickle cell disorders (SCD). Making Nigeria the country with the highest incidence of SCD. This article reviews the prevalence of CD in Nigeria; with emphasis on those having a heavy statistical burden on the country, the availability of community genetics services in Nigeria and the efforts being made to tackle the challenges of CD. A systematic review of birth prevalence of congenital malformations (CM) in Nigeria was done through a literature search, with no time restriction for publication dates. Only studies that included the birth prevalence of CM were included. Eligible studies with incorrect or missing data were excluded. This revealed a dearth of data on CD in Nigeria, as in most Low- and Middle-Income Countries. A predominance of CM of the musculoskeletal and gastrointestinal systems was found in Nigeria. However, the pattern of CM in the South-South region was more of the central nervous system. There is scarcity of resources to address the challenges of CD in Nigeria with feeble government assistance. Meanwhile, 70% of CD can be prevented and adequately managed by well implemented community genetics services.

Comparing models of delivery for cancer genetics services among patients receiving primary care who meet criteria for genetic evaluation in two healthcare systems: BRIDGE randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Advances in genetics and sequencing technologies are enabling the identification of more individuals with inherited cancer susceptibility who could benefit from tailored screening and prevention recommendations. While cancer family history information is used in primary care settings to identify unaffected patients who could benefit from a cancer genetics evaluation, this information is underutilized. System-level population health management strategies are needed to assist health care systems in identifying patients who may benefit from genetic services. In addition, because of the limited number of trained genetics specialists and increasing patient volume, the development of innovative and sustainable approaches to delivering cancer genetic services is essential.

METHODS

We are conducting a randomized controlled trial, entitled Broadening the Reach, Impact, and Delivery of Genetic Services (BRIDGE), to address these needs. The trial is comparing uptake of genetic counseling, uptake of genetic testing, and patient adherence to management recommendations for automated, patient-directed versus enhanced standard of care cancer genetics services delivery models. An algorithm-based system that utilizes structured cancer family history data available in the electronic health record (EHR) is used to identify unaffected patients who receive primary care at the study sites and meet current guidelines for cancer genetic testing. We are enrolling eligible patients at two healthcare systems (University of Utah Health and New York University Langone Health) through outreach to a randomly selected sample of 2780 eligible patients in the two sites, with 1:1 randomization to the genetic services delivery arms within sites. Study outcomes are assessed through genetics clinic records, EHR, and two follow-up questionnaires at 4 weeks and 12 months after last genetic counseling contactpre-test genetic counseling.

DISCUSSION

BRIDGE is being conducted in two healthcare systems with different clinical structures and patient populations. Innovative aspects of the trial include a randomized comparison of a chatbot-based genetic services delivery model to standard of care, as well as identification of at-risk individuals through a sustainable EHR-based system. The findings from the BRIDGE trial will advance the state of the science in identification of unaffected patients with inherited cancer susceptibility and delivery of genetic services to those patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

BRIDGE is registered as NCT03985852 . The trial was registered on June 6, 2019 at clinicaltrials.gov .

Family health history and genetic services-the East Baltimore community stakeholder interview project

Discussion of family health history (FH) has the potential to be a communication tool within families and with health providers to stimulate health promotion related to many chronic conditions, including those with genetic implications for prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment. Diverse communities with disparities in health outcomes may require different approaches to engage individuals and families in the evolving areas of genetic risk communication, assessment, and services. This work was a partnership of a local urban agency and academic genetics professionals to increase understanding of community concerns and preferences related to FH and genetic awareness. Thirty community stakeholders in the East Baltimore area participated in structured interviews conducted by community members. We identified key themes on family health history FH, risk assessment, and genetic services. Forty-three percent (18/27) of community stakeholders thought families in East Baltimore did not discuss family health history FH with doctors. Stakeholders recognized the benefits and challenges of potential actions based on genetic risk assessment and the multiple competing priorities of families. FH awareness with community engagement and genetics education were the major needs identified by the participants. Research undertaken in active collaboration with community partners can provide enhanced consumer perspectives on the importance of family health history and its potential connections to health promotion and prevention activities.

Provision of Genetic Services for Autism and its Impact on Spanish Families

Although a genetic evaluation can identify the etiology in 15-30% of individuals with autism spectrum disorder, several studies show an underuse of genetic services by affected families. We have explored the access to genetic services and perception of genetics and recurrence risk in parents of autistic children in Spain. Despite the high interest in genetics, our results show a remarkable underutilization of genetic services, with only 30% of families having visited a genetic service and 13% of patients having undergone the recommended genetic test. This poor service provision influenced recurrence risk perception and had a great impact on family planning. The National Health System should ensure their access to genetic services allowing them to take informed decisions with precise information.

Primary care providers' lived experiences of genetics in practice

To effectively translate genetic advances into practice, engagement of primary care providers (PCPs) is essential. Using a qualitative, phenomenological methodology, we analyzed key informant interviews and focus groups designed to explore perspectives of urban and rural PCPs. PCPs endorsed a responsibility to integrate genetics into their practices and expected advances in genetic medicine to expand. However, PCPs reported limited knowledge and difficulties accessing resources, experts, and continuing education. Rural practitioners’ additional concerns included cost, distance, and poor patient engagement. PCPs’ perspectives are crucial to develop relevant educational and systems-based interventions to further expand genetic medicine in primary care.

Development of FOCUS-GC: Framework for Outcomes of Clinical Communication Services in Genetic Counseling

Conceptual frameworks bring together existing theories and models in order to identify, consolidate, and fill in gaps between theory, practice, and evidence. Given the vast number of possible outcomes that could be studied in genetic counseling, a framework for organizing outcomes and postulating relationships between communication services and genetic counseling outcomes was sought. Through an iterative approach involving literature review, thematic analysis, and consolidation, outcomes and processes were categorized to create and define components of a conceptual framework. The final product, "Framework for Outcomes of Clinical commUnication Services" (FOCUS) contains the following domains: communication strategy; communication process measures; patient care experience, patient changes, patient health; and family changes. A website was created to allow easier access and ongoing modifications to the framework. In addition, a step-by-step guide and two examples were created to show flexibility in how the framework can be used. FOCUS may help in conceptualizing, organizing and summarizing outcomes research related to risk communication and counseling in genetic service delivery as well as other healthcare settings.

"My Plate is Full": Reasons for Declining a Genetic Evaluation of Hearing Loss

The aim of this study was to obtain patient and parent perspectives on genetic evaluation of hearing loss, in order to identify motivators, expectations, and barriers. Three focus groups were conducted following a semi-structured discussion guide, led by an independent moderator. Participants were hearing parents of children with permanent hearing loss or deaf adults. Qualitative content analysis was used to develop a codebook and identify major themes and subthemes. Participant views were compared to national guidelines. The 28 participants comprised 23 parents representing 21 unique families and 5 deaf adults. 13/21 families and 0/5 adults reported comorbidities, 4/21 families and 3/5 adults had a positive family history, and 12/21 families versus 0/5 adults had utilized genetics services. A common theme among adults and parents was a curiosity as to the cause of hearing loss. Parents were motivated to detect comorbidities and optimize care for hearing loss. Some parents felt overwhelmed by the hearing loss and unprepared to pursue early genetic evaluation as recommended in guidelines. Several reported positive experiences following genetics consultation, while others reported unease and unmet expectations. Notably, both parents and adults expressed ambivalence regarding the desire for genetic knowledge. Financial concerns and difficulties obtaining a referral were cited as extrinsic barriers. For parents of children with hearing loss, both the presence of comorbidities and a positive family history were drivers of genetics consultation and/or genetic testing. We identified educational opportunities for both patients and providers that would improve informed decision-making and increase access to genetic services. Consideration of the patient/family perspective and their decision-making processes, along with flexibility in the approach to genetics evaluation and its timing, will optimize both the development and implementation of guidelines.

Online Module for Carrier Screening in Ashkenazi Jewish Individuals Compared with In-Person Genetics Education: A Randomized Controlled Trial

To increase accessibility to genetics services for low-urgency patients seeking Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) carrier screening, we designed an interactive computer (IC) module that provides pre-test genetics education and allows genetics professionals to order the test without meeting the patients beforehand. We compared this module with in-person genetic counseling (GC) using a randomized trial. AJ individuals were randomized to undergo genetics education via the IC module (n = 26) or GC (n = 28). We compared post-interventional genetics knowledge, perceived genetic risk, and anxiety between the two groups, after accounting for pre-interventional scores, using ANCOVA. Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test was used to compare post-interventional satisfaction. Post-interventional genetics knowledge, risk perception, or anxiety were not significantly different between the two groups after accounting for baseline scores (p = 0.50-0.54), although the data are inconclusive regarding the module's non-inferiority at a 5% margin. Post-intervention satisfaction scores were generally higher in the GC group than the IC module group. Our IC module has the potential to improve access to clinical genetics services for patients and staff, but it is not suitable for all AJ patients and cannot completely replace the benefits of in-person consultations.

Inclusion of diverse populations in genomic research and health services: Genomix workshop report

Clinical genetic services and genomic research are rapidly developing but, historically, those with the greatest need are the least to benefit from these advances. This encompasses low-income communities, including those from ethnic minority and indigenous backgrounds. The "Genomix" workshop at the European Society of Human Genetics (ESHG) 2016 conference offered the opportunity to consider possible solutions for these disparities from the experiences of researchers and genetic healthcare practitioners working with underserved communities in the USA, UK and Australia. Evident from the workshop and corresponding literature is that a multi-faceted approach to engaging communities is essential. This needs to be complemented by redesigning healthcare systems that improves access and raises awareness of the needs of these communities. At a more strategic level, institutions involved in funding research, commissioning and redesigning genetic health services also need to be adequately represented by underserved populations with intrinsic mechanisms to disseminate good practice and monitor participation. Further, as genomic medicine is mainstreamed, educational programmes developed for clinicians should incorporate approaches to alleviate disparities in accessing genetic services and improving study participation.

A cost analysis of a cancer genetic service model in the UK

Technological advances in DNA sequencing have made gene testing fast and more affordable. Evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of genetic service models is essential for the successful translation of sequencing improvements for patient benefit, but remain sparse in the genetics literature. In particular, there is a lack of detailed cost data related to genetic services. A detailed micro-costing of 28 possible pathways relating to breast and/or ovarian cancer and BRCA testing was carried out by defining service activities and establishing associated costs. These data were combined with patient-level data from a Royal Marsden Cancer Genetics Service audit over a 6-month period during which BRCA testing was offered to individuals at ≥10 % risk of having a mutation, in line with current NICE guidance. The average cost across all patient pathways was £2227.39 (range £376.51 to £13,553.10). The average cost per pathway for an affected person was £1897.75 compared to £2410.53 for an unaffected person. Of the women seen in the Cancer Genetics Service during the audit, 38 % were affected with breast and/or ovarian cancer, and 62 % were unaffected but concerned about their family history. The most efficient service strategy is to identify unaffected relatives from an affected individual with an identified BRCA mutation. Implementation of this strategy would require more comprehensive testing of all eligible cancer patients, which could be achieved by integrating BRCA testing into oncology services. Such integration would be also more time-efficient and deliver greater equity of access to BRCA testing than the standard service model.

Factors Associated with Uptake of Genetics Services for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a common cardiovascular disorder with variable expressivity and incomplete penetrance. Clinical guidelines recommend consultation with a genetics professional as part of an initial assessment for HCM, yet there remains an underutilization of genetics services. We conducted a study to assess factors associated with this underutilization within the framework of the Health Belief Model (HBM). An online survey was completed by 306 affected individuals and at risk family members. Thirty-seven percent of individuals (113/306) had visited a genetics professional for reasons related to HCM. Genetic testing was performed on 53 % (162/306). Individuals who had undergone testing were more likely to have seen a genetics professional (p < 0.001), had relatives with an HCM diagnosis (p = 0.002), and have a known familial mutation (p < 0.001). They were also more likely to agree that genetic testing would satisfy their curiosity (p < 0.001), provide reassurance (p < 0.001), aid family members in making healthcare decisions (p < 0.001), and encourage them to engage in a healthier lifestyle (p = 0.002). The HBM components of cues to action and perceived benefits and barriers had the greatest impact on uptake of genetic testing. In order to ensure optimal counseling and care for individuals and families with HCM, awareness and education around HCM and genetic services should be promoted in both physicians and patients alike.