Genetic Counselor Role in Hospital Test Utilization

Author(s):  
Jessie Conta ◽  
Cheryl Hess ◽  
Jacquelyn Riley

Recently, hospital laboratories have significantly improved patient care by intercepting genetic tests that have been ordered in error or inappropriately. Such tests can be flagged before they are sent out to referral laboratories for testing. This is commonly performed by genetic counselors acting in support of test utilization management. This chapter details the role of the test utilization counselor. Multiple methods are described for developing and implementing a hospital-based test utilization management program for genetic testing.

Author(s):  
Melissa Dempsey ◽  
Jill A. Rosenfeld ◽  
Susan E. Walther

Laboratory genetic counselors are in a unique position to contribute to the medical literature on genetic testing and genetic conditions given their exposure to a wide variety and large volume of genetic tests and results. They have the opportunity to develop in-depth experience in a given area of genetic testing due to their proximity to laboratory directors and other colleagues with clinical and laboratory expertise. These experiences, coupled with advanced skills in verbal and written communication, enable them to contribute in many ways to the medical literature and generalizable knowledge of genetic testing. This chapter will describe the types of publications and research the laboratory genetic counselor may be involved in. It also outlines the ways in which this knowledge is communicated and translated into laboratory and clinical practice.


Author(s):  
Colleen Landy Schmitt ◽  
Gabriel A. Lazarin

Sales and marketing functions may be a good fit for laboratory genetic counselors. Genetic counselors can use the technical and communication skills they learned during genetic counseling training to perform roles in marketing and sales and as medical liaisons for genetic testing laboratories. This chapter describes how genetic counselors in sales roles use their genetic counseling background. It discusses the challenges and limitations of such roles. Resources for thriving in sales and marketing roles are provided.


2016 ◽  
Vol 146 (2) ◽  
pp. 221-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick C. Mathias ◽  
Jessie H. Conta ◽  
Eric Q. Konnick ◽  
Darci L. Sternen ◽  
Shannon M. Stasi ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Eric Rosenthal ◽  
April L. Studinski Jones

The laboratory genetic counselor is commonly called upon to serve as an educational resource within the genetic testing laboratory. This chapter outlines this unique genetic counseling role. Laboratory genetic counselors provide education about genetic testing and genetic concepts within the laboratory to existing laboratory staff, new laboratory genetic counselor colleagues, formal educational program participants (genetic counselor interns, graduate students, medical students and residents, and laboratory fellows), and laboratory colleagues. They also use their skills and knowledge to educate client laboratories and clinicians. They may also participate in public and community forums.


1997 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trudo Lemmens

Although few companies are currently applying genetic tests or using genetic data, further developments in genetics will likely increase the role of genetics in the workplace. This article discusses the complex ethical issues raised by the variety of genetic tests that could become available and proposes guidelines for dealing with genetics in the workplace. It discusses how the results of genetic testing could be used for employment purposes, and argues that the existence of unequal bargaining power in the workplace limits the validity of consent as a basis for policymaking. Instead, two specific justifications for genetic testing in the workplace are proposed: the protection of health and the avoidance of harm to others. The author suggests that genetic testing should be permitted only in exceptional circumstances and that every genetic test should be evaluated on its scientific validity and submitted to rigorous review. Existing antidiscrimination law proves to be a useful model for examining the rationality and proportionality of genetic testing in the workplace.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1590-1590
Author(s):  
Barry Tong ◽  
Hala Borno ◽  
Eric Jay Small ◽  
Fern Alagala ◽  
Amie Blanco ◽  
...  

1590 Background: Metastatic prostate Cancer (mPCa) is increasingly recognized as a heritable disease and germline genetic testing has increasingly become a part of standard of care. At the University of California at San Francisco (UCSF) Genitourinary (GU) Medical Oncology clinic, approximately 850 new patients with mPCa are seen annually. A feasibility pilot Genetic Testing Station (GTS) was developed to expand access to genetic testing among this high-risk population. GTS is facilitated by Genetic Counselor Assistants (GCA) under the supervision of genetic counselors. Methods: This is a feasibility pilot of a GTS model among patients with mPCa. In this model, all patients with mPCa are offered a same day GTS visit with a GCA. At the GTS, the patient receives pre-test education via videos developed by genetic counselors. The patient provides informed consent, a family history, and a saliva sample for Invitae’s 87-gene panel. All positive results trigger a genetic counselor visit while non-positive results either receive a letter or a genetic counselor visit (in person or via telehealth). To evaluate the model, testing frequency and laboratory turnaround time (TAT) was assessed before and after the pilot. Results: In the first four months of the GTS pilot (10/14/2019 – 02/10/2020), 94 patients were referred and received genetic testing. Eight germline positives were identified (BRCA2, CHEK2, HOXB13 MSH6, RECQL4). The average TAT was 8 days. 9.3% of patients were found to have pathogenic mutations through the prostate GTS which is comparable to previously published rates of germline mutations in metastatic prostate cancer patients. In a 4-month time frame the prior to the intervention (10/01/2018-1/31/2019), 26 genetic testing orders were placed. The average laboratory TAT in this prior process was 17 days. Rates of positive germline mutations in the prior model was 8.6%. Conclusions: The GTS is a feasible method to increase access to germline genetic testing among a high-risk population. It may reduce barriers to testing and facilitate real-time discussion of treatment and prevention strategies with patients and family members. As a result, we will continue to operate the GTS. This model provides a framework for scaling access for and cascade testing in other high-risk patient groups.


2014 ◽  
Vol 427 ◽  
pp. 193-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina E. Kotzer ◽  
Jacquelyn D. Riley ◽  
Jessie H. Conta ◽  
Claire M. Anderson ◽  
Kimberly A. Schahl ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document