Genetics in primary care: a USA faculty development initiative

The Genetics in Primary Care (GPC) project is a USA national faculty development initiative with the goal of enhancing the training of medical students and primary care residents by developing primary care faculty expertise in genetics. Educational strategies were developed for the project by an executive committee with input from an advisory committee, comprising individuals with primary care, medical education and genetics expertise. These committees identified the key issues in genetics education for primary care as (1) considering inherited disease in the differential diagnosis of common disorders; (2) using appropriate counseling strategies for genetic testing and diagnosis, and (3) understanding the implications of a genetic diagnosis for family members. The group emphasized the importance of a primary care perspective, which suggests that the clinical utility of genetic information is greatest when it has the potential to improve health outcomes. The group also noted that clinical practice already incorporates the use of family history information, providing a basis for discussing the application of genetic concepts in primary care. Genetics and primary care experts agreed that educational efforts will be most successful if they are integrated into existing primary care teaching programs, and use a case-based teaching format that incorporates both clinical and social dimensions of genetic disorders. Three core clinical skills were identified: (1) interpreting family history; (2) recognizing the variable clinical utility of genetic information, and (3) acquiring cultural competency. Three areas of potential controversy were identified as well: (1) the role of nondirective counseling versus shared decision-making in discussions of genetic testing; (2) the intrinsic value of genetic information when it does not influence health outcomes, and (3) indications for a genetics referral. The project provides an opportunity for ongoing discussion about these important issues.     

Attitudes about genetics in underserved, culturally diverse populations

OBJECTIVE: New medical discoveries regarding genetic susceptibility to common chronic diseases, and the decoding of the human genome have increased public attention to genetics. What information is understood and what attitudes exist towards genetics and genetic research have not been well examined in underserved, culturally diverse communities. METHODS: To better understand attitudes and beliefs towards genetics and genetic testing in these groups, we conducted eight focus groups with 55 patients and health care workers in New York City and Westchester, N.Y., in English, Spanish, and Chinese. RESULTS: Focus group participants had limited understanding about genetics or genetic testing. Newborn screening was the least-known genetic issue, even among health care workers. Regardless of their cultural group, most participants expressed a desire for more information about genetics and genetic tests. Latinos and Chinese participants generally expressed positive attitudes towards genetic studies and genetic testing, with the possibility of preventing diseases cited as the main advantage. Black Americans and Non-Hispanic Whites reported mixed feelings about genetic research and genetic testing. Concerns expressed included: anxiety before receiving test results or waiting for a disease to develop, fear of genetic discrimination by health and life insurance companies and employers, not having the financial means to deal with genetic diseases in themselves or a sick child, concern that children and adults are having too many tests. Black Americans expressed the most concern for possibly harmful use of genetic information. CONCLUSIONS: Minority populations of diverse cultures have limited knowledge about genetics and genetic testing, would like to have more information, and are not well reached by the current educational approaches. Participants knew the least about newborn screening, a test that is mandatory in the New York State. While genetic knowledge by minority populations was perhaps not different from the level of knowledge of consumers in general, minority populations are at particular risk of being left behind because of historically poor access to information and services.     

Banking biological collections: data warehousing, data mining, and data dilemmas in genomics and global health policy

While DNA databases may offer the opportunity to (1) assess population-based prevalence of specific genes and variants, (2) simplify the search for molecular markers, (3) improve targeted drug discovery and development for disease management, (4) refine strategies for disease prevention, and (5) provide the data necessary for evidence-based decision-making, serious scientific and social questions remain. Whether samples are identified, coded, or anonymous, biological banking raises profound ethical and legal issues pertaining to access, informed consent, privacy and confidentiality of genomic information, civil liberties, patenting, and proprietary rights. This paper provides an overview of key policy issues and questions pertaining to biological banking, with a focus on developments in specimen collection, transnational distribution, and public health and academic-industry research alliances. It highlights the challenges posed by the commercialization of genomics, and proposes the need for harmonization of biological banking policies.     

Legal and policy issues in genetics and insurance

Genetic screening and testing techniques provide a powerful diagnostic tool for the acquisition of predictive information. The potential value of such diagnostic techniques cannot be overstated. However, commercial organisations such as insurance companies and employers are also highly interested in the acquisition and use of genetic information. Concerns about the potential abuse of genetic information have stimulated a counter-current of public pressure for restrictions on the use which can be made of genetic diagnostic information. In a number of countries this pressure has generated enough concern to stimulate legislatures to enact laws which curtail the use and acquisition of genetic information. This pattern has clearly emerged in the United States of America and there are indications that similar trends are developing in Europe. This paper examines the law and policy issues arising from the interface between genetics and insurance.     

Cancer genetics service provision: a comparison of seven European centres

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a survey in seven European cancer genetics centres to compare service provision, organisation and practices for familial breast and colon cancer consultations and testing. Information was obtained on aspects of services both nationally and locally. METHODS: A detailed survey questionnaire was adapted collaboratively to obtain the required information. Initial survey data were collected within each centre and interim results were discussed at two European Workshops. Where differences in practice existed, details were clarified to ensure accuracy and adequacy of information. Participating centres were Haifa (Israel), Hannover (Germany), Leiden (The Netherlands), Leuven (Belgium), Manchester (UK), Marseille (France) and Milan (Italy), representing countries with populations ranging from 6.5 to 80 million. RESULTS: The European countries diverged in regard to the number of cancer genetics centres nationally (from 8 in Belgium to 37 in France), and the average population served by each centre (from 0.59 million in Israel to 3.32 million in Italy). All centres offered free care at the point of access, but referral to specialist care varied according to national health care provision. At a centre level, staff roles varied due to differences in training and health care provision. The annual number of counsellees seen in each participating centre ranged from 200 to over 1,700. Access to breast surveillance or bowel screening varied between countries, again reflecting differences in medical care pathways. These countries converged in regard to the wide availability of professional bodies and published guidelines promoting aspects of service provision. Similarities between centres included provision of a multidisciplinary team, with access to psychological support, albeit with varying degrees of integration. All services were dominated (70-90%) by referrals from families with an increased risk of breast cancer despite wide variation in referral patterns. Collection of pedigree data and risk assessment strategies were broadly similar, and centres used comparable genetic testing protocols. Average consultation times ranged between 45 and 90 min. All centres had access to a laboratory offering DNA testing for breast and bowel cancer-predisposing genes, although testing rates varied, reflecting the stage of service development and the type of population. Israel offered the highest number of genetic tests for breast cancer susceptibility because of the existence of specific founder mutations, in part explaining why the cancer genetics service in Haifa differed most from the other six. CONCLUSION: Despite considerable differences in service organisation, there were broad similarities in the provision of cancer genetic services in the centres surveyed.     

International cooperation and networking in genetic health care provision: issues arising from the genetic services plan for the Emilia-Romagna region, Italy

The aims of this report are to describe the genetic plan for Emilia-Romagna, a region in Italy, and to contribute to the international exchange of information on developing and applying policy frameworks to provide high-quality and comprehensive genetic health care in the publicly funded health systems. At the present time there is no national policy for genetic medicine in Italy, and only two regions, Emilia-Romagna and Liguria, have formally agreed to a strategic plan for health care in genetics. The current provision of genetic services in Emilia-Romagna is described focusing on the intra- and inter-organizational linkages to ensure a comprehensive system of coordinated activities. Strengths and implementation areas are highlighted. Points that must be solved within the regional or national context are the definition of the level of assistance required in genetic medicine, the formal professional recognition of the genetic counselor and the adjustment of the billing mechanisms to the complexities of clinical genetic services. Issues that need to be addressed at a wider level include full assessment of genetic tests before their introduction into clinical practice, networking to provide tests for the rarest genetic diseases, consensus on fundamental terminology and clinical and administrative data sets to promote a cohesive framework for the flow of information throughout the health care systems with respect to genetics.     

Parental attitudes and beliefs regarding the genetic testing of children

OBJECTIVES: To explore parental attitudes and beliefs about genetic testing of children for conditions that present throughout the life cycle. METHODS: Twelve semi-structured focus groups with black and white parents were conducted. RESULTS: Across racial groups, most respondents want access to genetic testing and believe that parents should be the final decision-makers. While most respondents believe it is important to share genetic information with relatives, white respondents want physicians to respect confidentiality absolutely, whereas some black respondents accept physician disclosures in specific situations. CONCLUSIONS: Professional policy statements are restrictive about access to predictive genetic testing of children. This conflicts with parental attitudes about who should have decisional authority. While there is consensus among respondents that genetic information should be shared with relatives, respondents disagree as to who should be responsible for disclosure, and when professionals should breach patient confidentiality.     

Archived specimens: a platform for discussion

To facilitate discussion, this paper describes various types of collections of specimens, their uses in research, types of identifiers, requirements for informed consent, third-party access to samples, recontact, and controversial ethical and social issues. There is need for public opinion research on people's views of these issues, with particular attention to the views of minority groups.     

Ethical aspects of genetic testing in the workplace

The European Group on Ethics and New Technologies, which advises the European Commission, has published an opinion paper on ethical aspects of genetic testing in the workplace. The paper goes well beyond the usual ethical issues, presenting a summary of genetic testing in the workplace in the United States and Europe and criteria for appropriate testing. Unlike many other documents on ethics, it pays close attention to the problem of false-positive and false-negative test results. Although no genetic tests are currently appropriate for screening workers or applicants for jobs in which occupational hazards exist, inappropriate testing has occurred and regulations are needed to ensure that only appropriate testing is used in the future. Workers or their representatives should be involved in deciding when and how genetic testing in the workplace is done.     

Genetics and Society Project

Faced with rapid advances in human genetics, policy makers are struggling to come to grips with a host of complex ethical, legal and social questions. The HUMGEN website gives policy makers and the public access to legislation, policy, guidelines and recommendations of government and nongovernmental organizations worldwide.     

What role for public health in genetics and vice versa?

Some epidemiologists and geneticists claim that integrating genetics into public health policies and programs is necessary and unavoidable. OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which further integration of public health and genetics is warranted. METHODS: Synthesis of the literature in four areas: research, genetic services, regulation, and education. The analysis is limited to human genetics. RESULTS: Public support for basic genetic research has and will continue to lead to new applications and to further understanding of human origins and dispersions. Some applied research, particularly for genetic risk factors for common complex diseases, has low yield and is better supported by private funds. The only genetic service for which a public health role is paramount is newborn screening. With the patenting of genes, and the proliferation of commercial interests in genetic tests and directly advertising them to the public, regulation by public health agencies is increasingly important. As most genetic testing and other services will be provided in the personal health care system, education about genetics is best left to the educational and medical systems. Public health practitioners should be aware of the limitations of genetic tests. CONCLUSIONS: There is little need for further integration of genetic services and education into public health especially in countries in which public and private health services are dichotomized. Newborn screening and follow-up, however, are most safely and effectively provided under public health auspices. The most important area for strengthening the public health role is in the regulation of genetic tests and other genetic services provided primarily by the private sector. Continued support for basic genetic research is needed.     

Genetic education to diverse communities employing a community empowerment model

Lack of equity in access to health care, in general, and genetic services in particular, places communities of color at a distinct disadvantage when considering the rapidly evolving genetic technology. Much of this disparity is owed to lack of trust and credibility in the genetic care system as well as multiple ethnocultural barriers to services. This paper presents a 3-year community outreach demonstration project in genetic education. The project employed the premise that the empowerment of the target communities to take active part in their genetic education, with attention to a wide array of the community's health care needs, is the most efficacious manner in which to provide genetic education to underserved communities.     

Barriers to access: results from focus groups to identify genetic service needs in the community

OBJECTIVE: In efforts to prepare for implications of genomic advances, a needs assessment was undertaken from 2000 to 2002 by the Michigan Department of Community Health to develop a comprehensive state plan for genetic services. This paper reports on the access barriers to genetic services identified from focus groups conducted with members of the community and genetic service providers. METHODS: Included in this study were the following five target groups: a sickle cell anemia parent support group, a Native American student group, parents of children with birth defects or other special health care needs, adults with genetic conditions, and genetic service providers from the statewide genetic counselors' association. Discussions of all groups were audio taped, transcribed and analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: Individual barriers to access identified included lack of awareness of personal risk, lack of knowledge of genetic services and resources, and lack of trust/fear of discrimination. Institutional barriers to access identified included provider lack of knowledge and awareness of genetic services, lack of workforce, coordination of care, cost and insurance, and location from services. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers to access cut across overlapping dimensions and overcoming these barriers will require solutions that target multiple dimensions in order to be effective.     

Analysis of the population structure in Oman

Knowledge of a population structure can be a unique aid in planning genetic services. In order to facilitate the development of genetic services in the Sultanate of Oman, a tribal data base has been developed. The historic records of the beginning of the 19th century were used as the basis and were updated with contemporary information. The tribal data base includes tribal names, locations, and the main 185 major tribes and their subsections. Tribal data can be used for health care planning and the development of disease-specific genetic registers if the hospital records also include the tribal name. They may also provide a useful aid in genetic screening and disease prevention programmes, as when specific mutations are found in rare diseases, it is likely that these will be found to be exclusive to specific tribes, and laboratory testing will be greatly simplified. It is likely that similar data bases could be developed elsewhere in the Middle East and in the immigrant communities in Western Europe.     

Assessment of two 'low-tech' genetic health care procedures performed by prenatal care providers in Washington state: implications for future policy development activities

Equity in health care demands that patients be treated fairly, impartially and with justice. Health care professionals and others have long been aware of the concept of equity, and the many inequities that exist in our health care system. As part of our analysis of postpartum data collected between 1993 and 1996 by the Washington Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) from self-administered patient surveys, we explored equity as it pertains to two 'low-tech' prenatal genetic health care procedures: (1) whether or not prenatal care providers asked their patients about a family history of birth defects/genetic disorders, and (2) whether or not prenatal care providers talked to their patients about prenatal testing for birth defects/genetic disorders. Overall, about 80% of pregnant women reported that they had been asked about their family history of birth defects/genetic disorders, and about 85% said that their prenatal care provider(s) had talked to them about prenatal testing. Maternal characteristics associated with a lower likelihood of receiving these two low-tech genetic health care procedures appeared to be young maternal age, and low education and income levels, regardless of where women with these attributes received their prenatal care (e.g. community, migrant, health department or military health care clinics, private physicians, or health maintenance organizations).     

Medical genetics in Peru

Peru has a growing population characterized by notorious socioeconomic differences. The main health problems are acquired diseases related to sanitary conditions that affect mainly the large segment afflicted by poverty and extreme poverty. The state's health policy does not contemplate any action on congenital or genetic conditions, and genetic services are considered a very low priority. In spite of this, some of the best medical schools have undergraduate and graduate programs in genetics, and there is a growing group of specialists that makes its best to impulse the practice of medical genetics in Peru. Many ethical and legal dilemmas, common to other countries in the region, and derived from social inequality, and political, cultural and religious factors, are also faced in everyday practice.     

Consumer perspectives on genetic testing, research and services for ethnoculturally diverse populations

A panel of individuals from diverse ethnocultural backgrounds and representing a variety of genetic disorders presented their consumer perspectives on genetic programs, testing and services. Their remarks emphasized how misunderstanding and miscommunication between health care professionals and many of the populations for whom they provide services can lead to unfilled genetic service needs. Panelists recommended that health care professionals become more aware and knowledgeable about the diversity of customs, beliefs and cultures of those receiving their services. Only by building a foundation of trust and mutual respect will genetic testing, research and services become more accessible to individuals from diverse populations, their families and their communities.     

Genetic counselling: evolution or involution?

The need for genetic counselling derives from the peculiarities of genetic information, as compared to other biomedical tests, with particular reference to (a) its predictive character; (b) the existing gap between the ability to diagnose and to treat an inherited disorder, and (c) the psychological, social and ethical problems that genetic testing can raise. Counselling is traditionally performed by healthcare professionals, specifically trained to help individuals to develop ways of dealing with genetic information and gain a better understanding of the problems related with it. The growing number of genetic tests (for rare Mendelian as well as for common disorders), the development of easier and cheaper molecular techniques, the increasing tendency of physicians to have recourse to genetic tests, by-passing alternative diagnostic procedures, are all factors that contribute to the vast increase in the demand for genetic tests, a demand which is significantly out of step with the available numbers of trained counsellors. This paper discusses possible solutions, including the institution of committees with regulatory powers on genetic testing, the promotion of studies on models of genetic services, on programmes to monitor the services currently offered by test providers, and the expansion of training programmes and of employment opportunities for genetic counsellors.     

Public knowledge and public trust

As health care applications derived from human genetics research are likely to move increasingly from 'clinic to community', there is growing interest not just in how patients understand and take up health-related genetic information but also in the views of the wider population, as well as a range of professional groups. In this paper, issues relating public knowledge and public trust are raised and discussed in an attempt to move forward debates about public involvement in genomic research and the role of sociologists within interdisciplinary teams. As the field of public understanding of science has developed, we have seen a shift from a focus on the lack of scientific literacy as problem to a recognition of the range of different knowledges that people have and use as they confront science and technology in their everyday lives. As a mood for dialogue pervades many institutions in their relations with 'publics', attention must now be paid to the way in which knowledge and expertise is expressed, heard and acted upon in dialogic encounters. There is increasing concern about public trust in science and calls to increase public confidence, particularly through more open engagement with a range of publics. However, lack of trust or loss of confidence may be constructed as problems rather than reflecting empirical reality, where more complex relationships and attitudes prevail. Lack of trust is often privatized, deeply rooted in lived experience and routinely managed. Trust relations are generally characterized by ambivalence, uncertainty and risk, and are always provisional. Drawing on selected literature and empirical research to review and illustrate this field, this paper argues that scepticism or ambivalence on the part of publics are not necessarily problems to be overcome in the interest of scientific progress, but rather should be mobilized to enhance open and public debates about the nature and direction of genomics research, medicine, and the related social and ethical issues. Just as there can be no resolute expression of public knowledge or public opinion, it is unlikely that there is a resolute expression of public trust in genomics. However, ambivalence and scepticism can be harnessed as powerful resource for change, whether through the mobilization of public knowledges or the development of greater reflexivity within scientific institutions. This demands a sharing of power and greater public involvement in the early stages of policy formation and scientific and medical agenda setting.     

Economic considerations for health insurance coverage of emerging genetic tests

Public and private health insurance plans face the question of whether to cover emerging genetic tests for cancer and other diseases. This paper outlines issues in the economic evaluation of new genetic tests, illustrating key methodological issues and policy implications with findings from a comprehensive and systematic review of the 14 full economic evaluations published over the past 5 years that have addressed both the costs and consequences of molecular genetic tests. Key questions for framing an evaluation include: whose viewpoint matters, which costs and consequences are relevant, and to which clinical alternatives should new genetic tests be compared? While economic evaluation research can inform coverage decisions about genetic tests, the coverage decision-making process must also inform economic researchers about the aims, context, and value systems within which genetic tests will be covered and practised.