scholarly journals Public Health Genomics and Genetic Test Evaluation: The Challenge of Conducting Behavioural Research on the Utility of Lifestyle-Genetic Tests

2008 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
pp. 224-231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saskia C. Sanderson ◽  
Jane Wardle ◽  
Steve E. Humphries
2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 292-293
Author(s):  
H. Burton

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11029-11029
Author(s):  
Maren Theresa Scheuner ◽  
Paloma Sales ◽  
Mary Whooley ◽  
Katherine Hoggatt ◽  
Michael Kelley

11029 Background: Genetic testing has become essential to delivery of cancer treatment, risk assessment, surveillance, and prevention. We sought to understand the use of genetic tests by clinicians in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Methods: We administered a web-based survey to clinicians at 20 VA facilities with precision oncology programs. We excluded respondents if they were: not at one of the 20 VA facilities; not seeing patients in VA; not a physician, nurse practitioner (NP), physician assistant (PA), or pharmacist; a medical geneticist or specialty was not reported; or if the survey was incomplete. Using multiple logistic regression, we assessed the association between genetic test ordering, genetics referral, and clinician characteristics. Results: There were 909 (909/11,442, 8%) eligible respondents with 61% women and 64% under age 55. There were 571 physicians (63%), 200 NPs (22%), 93 pharmacists (10%), and 45 PAs 5(%). There were 361 (40%) primary care providers (PCPs), 90 (10%) cancer specialists, and 458 (50%) non-cancer specialists. Only 21% of clinicians reported feeling prepared to use genetic tests in their practice. In the past year, only 8% had ordered at least one multi-gene cancer test (germline, tumor or both), 12% a pharmacogenetic test, and 0.2%, an exome. Compared to physicians, NPs were 60% less likely (OR = 0.42, 0.23-0.77, p = 0.005), pharmacists, 80% less likely (OR = 0.22, 0.08-0.62, p = 0.005), and PAs, 90% less likely (OR = 0.08, 0.01-0.58, p = 0.01) to have ordered a genetic test. Compared to PCPs, cancer specialists were almost 5 times more likely to order a genetic test (OR = 4.74, 2.57-8.73, p < 0.0001); there was no difference in genetic test ordering between PCPs and non-cancer specialists. Among clinicians (n = 72) who had ordered cancer genetic tests, only about two-thirds were confident in knowing the indications for testing; discussing the potential benefits, harms and limitations of testing; understanding the test report; and knowing implications of results on disease management and prevention. Clinicians (n = 106) who had ordered pharmacogenetic tests had lower frequencies of confidence in these tasks. About half (52%) of the cancer specialists had referred patients to genetics in the past year; they were 1.8 times more likely than PCPs to refer (OR = 1.82, 1.10-3.03, p = 0.02), and non-cancer specialists were about 50% less likely than PCPs to refer (OR = 0.46, 0.33-0.64, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: In the VA, cancer specialists are integrating genetic testing and genetics referral into their practice more than PCPs and other specialists. However, genetic testing is underutilized, and many clinicians remain unprepared to use genetic tests in their practice. These results will inform workforce planning, clinician education, and development of clinical decision support to facilitate genetic risk assessment, informed consent, and ordering of genetic tests.


2021 ◽  
pp. 003335492110557
Author(s):  
Karen L. Niemchick ◽  
Ally Goerge ◽  
Amy H. Ponte

Objective With the completion of the Human Genome Project and swift development of genomic technologies, public health practitioners can use these advancements to more precisely target disease interventions to populations at risk. To integrate these innovations into better health outcomes, public health professionals need to have at least a basic understanding of genomics within various disciplines of public health. This descriptive study focused on the current level of genomics content in accredited master of public health (MPH) programs in the United States. Methods We conducted an internet search on all 171 Council on Education for Public Health (CEPH)–accredited MPH programs in the United States for genomics content in required and elective courses using the search terms “genetics,” “genomics,” and “molecular.” Results Of the 171 CEPH-accredited MPH programs examined, 52 (30.4%) schools and programs in 34 states offered some type of genomics education. Thirty-five (20.5%) schools and programs had a course in genetic epidemiology, 29 (16.9%) had a course in genetic biostatistics or bioinformatics, and 17 (9.9%) had a course in general public health genomics. The remaining 119 offered no course with a focus on genetics or genomics. In addition, some electives or specifically focused courses related to genomics were offered. Conclusion We found inadequate training in public health genomics for MPH students. To realize the promise of precision public health and to increase the understanding of genomics among the public health workforce, MPH programs need to find ways to integrate genomics education into their curricula.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document