scholarly journals Genetic Referral Patterns and Responses to Clinical Scenarios: A Survey of Primary Care Providers and Clinical Geneticists

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 215013272110467
Author(s):  
Tina K. Truong ◽  
Aileen Kenneson ◽  
Ami R. Rosen ◽  
Rani H. Singh
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Genetic Services ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Referral Patterns ◽  
Practice Characteristics ◽  
Clinical Scenarios ◽  
Genetics Services

Introduction: Primary care physicians (PCPs) are considered the gatekeepers of genetic services, but they often underutilize or inappropriately utilize such services, leading to lack of early treatment, incorrect diagnoses, and unnecessary procedures. This study aims to delineate PCP referral patterns, including the frequency of, motivators for, and barriers to genetic referrals and testing in the present landscape of genomics. Methods: A 34-item online survey was distributed to PCPs in the United States (US). PCP demographics, practice characteristics, and referral patterns, motivators, and barriers were analyzed. Six hypothetical clinical scenarios included in the survey also were presented to a cohort of clinical geneticists. We calculated PCPs’ rates of ordering genetic tests and of referral to genetics services in the past year. Rates and responses to clinical scenarios were compared based on respondents’ personal and practice characteristics. Results: A total of 95 PCPs and 25 clinical geneticists participated. Among the PCPs, 79% reported referring and 50% reported ordering genetic testing in the last year. PCPs with genetic counselors (GCs) in their clinic referred at significantly higher rates than those without ( P = .008). White PCPs referred at significantly higher rates compared to Black or African American PCPs ( P = .009). The most commonly reported motivators for referring patients to genetic services were preference for specialist coordination, lack of knowledge, and family’s desire for risk information. The most commonly reported barriers were patient refusal, provider concerns about costs to patients, and uncertainty of when a genetic referral is appropriate. In response to clinical scenarios, clinical geneticists were in agreement about the need for genetic testing or referral for 2 of the scenarios. For these 2 scenarios, only 48% and 71% of PCPs indicated that they would offer genetic testing or referral, respectively. Conclusions: Responses to clinical scenarios suggest that it is not clear to PCPs when referrals or testing are needed. Collaboration with GCs is one approach to reducing barriers to and improving PCPs’ utilization of genetic services. Clear guidelines from clinical geneticists may help facilitate appropriate use of genetics services by PCPs. Additional research is needed to further describe barriers that PCPs face in genetic testing/referrals.

scholarly journals Primary Care Physician Experiences with Integrated Population-Scale Genetic Testing: A Mixed-Methods Assessment

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 165
Author(s):  
Amy A. Lemke ◽  
Laura M. Amendola ◽  
Kristine Kuchta ◽  
Henry M. Dunnenberger ◽  
Jennifer Thompson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Data Privacy ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Genomic Medicine ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Physician ◽  
Care Providers

The scalable delivery of genomic medicine requires collaboration between genetics and non-genetics providers. Thus, it is essential to investigate and address the perceived value of and barriers to incorporating genetic testing into the clinical practice of primary care providers (PCPs). We used a mixed-methods approach of qualitative interviews and surveys to explore the experience of PCPs involved in the pilot DNA-10K population genetic testing program. Similar to previous research, PCPs reported low confidence with tasks related to ordering, interpreting and managing the results of genetic tests, and identified the need for additional education. PCPs endorsed high levels of utility for patients and their families but noted logistical challenges to incorporating genetic testing into their practice. Overall PCPs were not familiar with the United States’ Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act and they expressed high levels of concern for patient data privacy and potential insurance discrimination. This PCP feedback led to the development and implementation of several processes to improve the PCP experience with the DNA-10K program. These results contribute to the knowledge base regarding genomic implementation using a mixed provider model and may be beneficial for institutions developing similar clinical programs.

scholarly journals Identification, Evaluation, and Treatment of Patients with Hereditary Cancer Risk within the United States

ISRN Oncology ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah Cragun ◽  
Tuya Pal
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Risk Patients

Recognizing the importance of identifying patients at high risk for inherited cancer predisposition, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has outlined specific family history patterns associated with an increased risk for BRCA mutations. However, national data indicate a need to facilitate the ability of primary care providers to appropriately identify high risk patients. Once a patient is identified as high risk, it is necessary for the patient to undergo a detailed genetics evaluation to generate a differential diagnosis, determine a cost-effective genetic testing strategy, and interpret results of testing. With identification of inherited predisposition, risk management strategies in line with national guidelines can be implemented to improve patient outcomes through cancer risk reduction and early detection. As use of genetic testing increasingly impacts patient outcomes, the role of primary care providers in the identification and care of individuals at high risk for hereditary cancer becomes even more important. Nevertheless it should be acknowledged that primary care providers face many competing demands and challenges to identify high risk patients. Therefore initiatives which promote multidisciplinary and coordinated care, potentially through academic-community partnerships, may provide an opportunity to enhance care of these patients.

scholarly journals 145. Monthly Antibiotic Prescribing Peer Comparison Combined with In-person Education Decreases Antibiotic Prescribing for Acute Respiratory Infections

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S83-S83
Author(s):  
Shelby J Kolo ◽  
David J Taber ◽  
Ronald G Washburn ◽  
Katherine A Pleasants
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Respiratory Infections ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Delivery Mode ◽  
Antibiotic Prescribing ◽  
Acute Respiratory Infections ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Intervention Period ◽  
Provider Education

Abstract Background Inappropriate antibiotic prescribing is an important modifiable risk factor for antibiotic resistance. Approximately half of all antibiotics prescribed for acute respiratory infections (ARIs) in the United States may be inappropriate or unnecessary. The purpose of this quality improvement (QI) project was to evaluate the effect of three consecutive interventions on improving antibiotic prescribing for ARIs (i.e., pharyngitis, rhinosinusitis, bronchitis, common cold). Methods This was a pre-post analysis of an antimicrobial stewardship QI initiative to improve antibiotic prescribing for ARIs in six Veterans Affairs (VA) primary care clinics. Three distinct intervention phases occurred. Educational interventions included training on appropriate antibiotic prescribing for ARIs. During the first intervention period (8/2017-1/2019), education was presented virtually to primary care providers on a single occasion. In the second intervention period (2/2019-10/2019), in-person education with peer comparison was presented on a single occasion. In the third intervention period (11/2019-4/2020), education and prescribing feedback with peer comparison was presented once in-person followed by monthly emails of prescribing feedback with peer comparison. January 2016-July 2017 was used as a pre-intervention baseline period. The primary outcome was the antibiotic prescribing rate for all classifications of ARIs. Secondary outcomes included adherence to antibiotic prescribing guidance for pharyngitis and rhinosinusitis. Descriptive statistics and interrupted time series segmented regression were used to analyze the outcomes. Results Monthly antibiotic prescribing peer comparison emails in combination with in-person education was associated with a statistically significant 12.5% reduction in the rate of antibiotic prescribing for ARIs (p=0.0019). When provider education alone was used, the reduction in antibiotic prescribing was nonsignificant. Conclusion Education alone does not significantly reduce antibiotic prescribing for ARIs, regardless of the delivery mode. In contrast, education followed by monthly prescribing feedback with peer comparison was associated with a statistically significant reduction in ARI antibiotic prescribing rates. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals Complementary and Integrative Health Knowledge and Practice in Primary Care Settings: A Survey of Primary Care Providers in the Northwestern United States

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 216495612110233
Author(s):  
Malaika R Schwartz ◽  
Allison M Cole ◽  
Gina A Keppel ◽  
Ryan Gilles ◽  
John Holmes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Knowledge ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Integrative Health ◽  
And Training

Background The demand for complementary and integrative health (CIH) is increasing by patients who want to receive more CIH referrals, in-clinic services, and overall care delivery. To promote CIH within the context of primary care, it is critical that providers have sufficient knowledge of CIH, access to CIH-trained providers for referral purposes, and are comfortable either providing services or co-managing patients who favor a CIH approach to their healthcare. Objective The main objective was to gather primary care providers’ perspectives across the northwestern region of the United States on their CIH familiarity and knowledge, clinic barriers and opportunities, and education and training needs. Methods We conducted an online, quantitative survey through an email invitation to all primary care providers (n = 483) at 11 primary care organizations from the WWAMI (Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana and Idaho) region Practice and Research Network (WPRN). The survey questions covered talking about CIH with patients, co-managing care with CIH providers, familiarity with and training in CIH modalities, clinic barriers to CIH integration, and interest in learning more about CIH modalities. Results 218 primary care providers completed the survey (45% response rate). Familiarity with individual CIH methods ranged from 73% (chiropracty) to 8% (curanderismo). Most respondents discussed CIH with their patients (88%), and many thought that their patients could benefit from CIH (41%). The majority (89%) were willing to co-manage a patient with a CIH provider. Approximately one-third of respondents had some expertise in at least one CIH modality. Over 78% were interested in learning more about the safety and efficacy of at least one CIH modality. Conclusion Primary care providers in the Northwestern United States are generally familiar with CIH modalities, are interested in referring and co-managing care with CIH providers, and would like to have more learning opportunities to increase knowledge of CIH.

scholarly journals VitalSign6: A Primary Care First (PCP-First) Model for Universal Screening and Measurement-Based Care for Depression

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madhukar Trivedi ◽  
Manish Jha ◽  
Farra Kahalnik ◽  
Ronny Pipes ◽  
Sara Levinson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Mental Health Professionals ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Universal Screening ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Similar Treatment ◽  
Measurement Based Care

Major depressive disorder affects one in five adults in the United States. While practice guidelines recommend universal screening for depression in primary care settings, clinical outcomes suffer in the absence of optimal models to manage those who screen positive for depression. The current practice of employing additional mental health professionals perpetuates the assumption that primary care providers (PCP) cannot effectively manage depression, which is not feasible, due to the added costs and shortage of mental health professionals. We have extended our previous work, which demonstrated similar treatment outcomes for depression in primary care and psychiatric settings, using measurement-based care (MBC) by developing a model, called Primary Care First (PCP-First), that empowers PCPs to effectively manage depression in their patients. This model incorporates health information technology tools, through an electronic health records (EHR) integrated web-application and facilitates the following five components: (1) Screening (2) diagnosis (3) treatment selection (4) treatment implementation and (5) treatment revision. We have implemented this model as part of a quality improvement project, called VitalSign6, and will measure its success using the Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. In this report, we provide the background and rationale of the PCP-First model and the operationalization of VitalSign6 project.

Presentation and Referral Patterns in Pediatric Closed Hand Fractures

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472110085
Author(s):  
Landis R. Walsh ◽  
Laura C. Nuzzi ◽  
Amir H. Taghinia ◽  
Brian I. Labow
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Emergency Department ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Referral Patterns ◽  
Old Patients ◽  
Hand Surgeon ◽  
Hand Fractures ◽  
The Mean

Background Although pediatric hand fractures are common and generally have good outcomes, they remain a considerable source of anxiety for non–hand surgeons, who are less familiar with these injuries. We hypothesized that this anxiety may manifest as inefficiency in referral patterns. Methods The records of pediatric patients with isolated, closed hand fractures without concurrent trauma seen at our institution by a hand surgeon between January 2017 and December 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Results There were 454 patients included; 62.1% were men, and the mean age was 9.6 years at initial encounter. Most patients (89.6%) were treated nonoperatively and incurred few complications (0.5%). Roughly half of all cases (n = 262) initially presented to an outside provider. Of these, 24.0% (n = 64 of 262) were evaluated by 2+ providers before a hand surgeon. Most commonly, these patients were referred from an outside emergency department (ED) to our ED before hand surgeon evaluation (n = 45 of 64). Forty-seven patients required surgery; however, none were performed urgently. Although a greater proportion of 7- to 11-year-old patients saw 2+ providers prior to a hand surgeon ( P = .007), fewer required surgery ( P < .001). Conclusions Pediatric closed hand fractures are mainly treated nonoperatively and nonemergently with generally excellent outcomes. Our data suggest that many patients continue to be referred through the ED or multiple EDs/providers for treatment. These inefficient referral patterns demonstrate the need for better education for ED and primary care providers, as well as better communication between these providers and local pediatric hand surgeons. Advancements in these areas are likely to improve efficiency of care and decrease costs.

scholarly journals A Scoping Review of Trauma-Informed Curricula for Primary Care Providers

2021 ◽  
Vol 53 (10) ◽  
pp. 843-856
Author(s):  
Constance Gundacker ◽  
Tyler W. Barreto ◽  
Julie P. Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Traumatic Experiences ◽  
Search Term ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Trauma Informed ◽  
The Impact

Background and Objectives: Traumatic experiences such as abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction have a lifetime prevalence of 62%-75% and can negatively impact health outcomes. However, many primary care providers (PCPs) are inadequately prepared to treat patients with trauma due to a lack of training. Our objective was to identify trauma-informed approach curricula for PCPs, review their effectiveness, and identify gaps. Methods: We systematically identified articles from Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Academic Search Premier, Cochrane, PsycINFO, MedEd Portal, and the STFM Resource Library. Search term headings “trauma-informed care (TIC),” “resilience,” “patient-centered care,” “primary care,” and “education.” Inclusion criteria were PCP, pediatric and adult patients, and training evaluation. Exclusion criteria were outside the United States, non-English articles, non-PCPs, and inpatient settings. We used the TIC pyramid to extract topics. We analyzed evaluation methods using the Kirkpatrick Model. Results: Researchers reviewed 6,825 articles and identified 17 different curricula. Understanding health effects of trauma was the most common topic (94%). Evaluation data revealed overall positive reactions and improved knowledge, attitudes, and confidence. Half (53%) reported Kirkpatrick level 3 behavior change evaluation outcomes with increased trauma screening and communication, but no change in referrals. Only 12% (2/17) evaluated Kirkpatrick level 4 patient satisfaction (significant results) and health outcomes (not significant). Conclusions: Pilot findings from studies in our review show trauma-informed curricula for PCPs reveal positive reactions, an increase in knowledge, screening, communication, and patient satisfaction, but no change in referrals or health outcomes. Further research is needed to examine the impact of trainings on quality of care and health outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document