GP attitudes to and expectations for providing personal genomic risk information to the public: a qualitative study.
Journal
BJGP open
ISSN: 2398-3795
Titre abrégé: BJGP Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101713531
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2019
Apr 2019
Historique:
received:
03
05
2018
accepted:
20
08
2018
entrez:
4
5
2019
pubmed:
3
5
2019
medline:
3
5
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
As part of a pilot randomised controlled trial examining the impact of personal melanoma genomic risk information on behavioural and psychosocial outcomes, GPs were sent a booklet containing their patient's genomic risk of melanoma. Using this booklet as an example of genomic risk information that might be offered on a population-level in the future, this study explored GP attitudes towards communicating genomic risk information and resources needed to support this process. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 Australian GPs. The interviews were recorded and transcribed, and data were analysed thematically. GPs in this sample believed that communicating genomic risk may become a responsibility within primary care and they recommended a shared decisionmaking approach to guide the testing process. Factors were identified that may influence how and when GPs communicate genomic risk information. GPs view genomics-based risk as one of many disease risk factors and feel that this type of information could be applied in practice in the context of overall risk assessment for diseases for which prevention and early detection strategies are available. They believe it is important to ensure that patients understand their genomic risk and do not experience long-term adverse psychological responses. GPs desire clinical practice guidelines that specify recommendations for genomic risk assessment and patient management, point-of-care resources, and risk prediction tools that include genomic and traditional risk factors. These findings will inform the development of resources for preparing GPs to manage and implement genomic risk information in practice.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
As part of a pilot randomised controlled trial examining the impact of personal melanoma genomic risk information on behavioural and psychosocial outcomes, GPs were sent a booklet containing their patient's genomic risk of melanoma.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
Using this booklet as an example of genomic risk information that might be offered on a population-level in the future, this study explored GP attitudes towards communicating genomic risk information and resources needed to support this process.
DESIGN & SETTING
METHODS
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 Australian GPs.
METHOD
METHODS
The interviews were recorded and transcribed, and data were analysed thematically.
RESULTS
RESULTS
GPs in this sample believed that communicating genomic risk may become a responsibility within primary care and they recommended a shared decisionmaking approach to guide the testing process. Factors were identified that may influence how and when GPs communicate genomic risk information. GPs view genomics-based risk as one of many disease risk factors and feel that this type of information could be applied in practice in the context of overall risk assessment for diseases for which prevention and early detection strategies are available. They believe it is important to ensure that patients understand their genomic risk and do not experience long-term adverse psychological responses. GPs desire clinical practice guidelines that specify recommendations for genomic risk assessment and patient management, point-of-care resources, and risk prediction tools that include genomic and traditional risk factors.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
These findings will inform the development of resources for preparing GPs to manage and implement genomic risk information in practice.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31049413
doi: 10.3399/bjgpopen18X101633
pii: 01633
pmc: PMC6480852
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
bjgpopen18X101633Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
Références
Lancet. 2001 Aug 11;358(9280):483-8
pubmed: 11513933
Genet Test. 2002 Summer;6(2):115-8
pubmed: 12215250
J Clin Oncol. 2004 May 15;22(10):1823-9
pubmed: 15067026
Aust Fam Physician. 2006 Jul;35(7):537-40
pubmed: 16820831
Br J Gen Pract. 2010 May;60(574):e221-30
pubmed: 20423577
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Oct 06;(10):CD007275
pubmed: 20927756
Nat Genet. 2013 Apr;45(4):349-51
pubmed: 23535723
J Intern Med. 2013 Nov;274(5):451-6
pubmed: 24127941
Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51
pubmed: 24979285
J Transl Med. 2014 Aug 28;12:238
pubmed: 25164605
Genet Med. 2015 Mar;17(3):169-76
pubmed: 25210938
J Pers Med. 2015 Jun 09;5(2):191-212
pubmed: 26068647
Ann Intern Med. 2016 Apr 19;164(8):513-22
pubmed: 26928821
BMJ. 2016 Mar 15;352:i1102
pubmed: 26979548
BMC Fam Pract. 2016 Jul 22;17:89
pubmed: 27445117
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2017 Feb;26(2):212-221
pubmed: 27702805
J Gen Intern Med. 2017 Mar;32(3):315-324
pubmed: 27995427
Br J Gen Pract. 2017 Feb;67(655):58-59
pubmed: 28126856
Br J Dermatol. 2017 Sep;177(3):779-790
pubmed: 28627002
Front Public Health. 2017 Aug 04;5:195
pubmed: 28824901
J Genet Couns. 2018 Feb;27(1):16-20
pubmed: 29052810
Br J Gen Pract. 2017 Dec;67(665):540-541
pubmed: 29192097
J Community Genet. 2018 Jul;9(3):283-291
pubmed: 29280052
JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Mar 1;178(3):338-346
pubmed: 29356820
Transl Behav Med. 2018 Jan 29;8(1):137-143
pubmed: 29385587
BMC Med Genomics. 2018 Feb 13;11(1):18
pubmed: 29433521
Mol Genet Genomic Med. 2018 Jan;6(1):35-43
pubmed: 29471590
J Genet Couns. 2018 Sep;27(5):1187-1199
pubmed: 29500626
Eur J Hum Genet. 2018 Aug;26(8):1094-1100
pubmed: 29706632
Hum Mol Genet. 2018 Aug 1;27(R2):R250-R258
pubmed: 29750248
Genet Med. 2019 Feb;21(2):311-318
pubmed: 29904163
JAMA Surg. 2018 Oct 1;153(10):909-916
pubmed: 29971344
Genet Med. 2019 Mar;21(3):727-735
pubmed: 29976988