A Rapid Systematic Review of Outcomes Studies in Genetic Counseling

As healthcare reimbursement is increasingly tied to value-of-service, it is critical for the genetic counselor (GC) profession to demonstrate the value added by GCs through outcomes research. We conducted a rapid systematic literature review to identify outcomes of genetic counseling. Web of Science (including PubMed) and CINAHL databases were systematically searched to identify articles meeting the following criteria: 1) measures were assessed before and after genetic counseling (pre-post design) or comparisons were made between a GC group vs. a non-GC group (comparative cohort design); 2) genetic counseling outcomes could be assessed independently of genetic testing outcomes, and 3) genetic counseling was conducted by masters-level genetic counselors, or non-physician providers. Twenty-three papers met the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies were in the cancer genetic setting and the most commonly measured outcomes included knowledge, anxiety or distress, satisfaction, perceived risk, genetic testing (intentions or receipt), health behaviors, and decisional conflict. Results suggest that genetic counseling can lead to increased knowledge, perceived personal control, positive health behaviors, and improved risk perception accuracy as well as decreases in anxiety, cancer-related worry, and decisional conflict. However, further studies are needed to evaluate a wider array of outcomes in more diverse genetic counseling settings.     

Expansion of Genetic Services Utilizing a General Genetic Counseling Clinic

We established a general genetic counseling clinic (GCC) to help reduce long wait times for new patient appointments and to enhance services for a subset of patients. Genetic counselors, who are licensed in Tennessee, were the primary providers and MD geneticists served as medical advisors. This article describes the clinic referral sources, reasons for referral and patient dispositions following their GCC visit(s). We obtained patients by triaging referrals made to our medical genetics division. Over 24 months, our GCC provided timely visits for 321 patients, allowing the MD geneticists to focus on patients needing a clinical exam and/or complex medical management. Following their GCC visit(s), over 80 % of patients did not need additional appointments with an MD geneticist. The GCC allowed the genetic counselor to spend more time with patients than is possible in our traditional medical genetics clinic. Patient satisfaction surveys (n?=?30) were very positive overall concerning the care provided. Added benefits for the genetic counselors were increased professional responsibility, autonomy and visibility as health care providers. We conclude that genetic counselors are accepted as health care providers by patients and referring providers for a subset of clinical genetics cases. A GCC can expand genetic services, complement more traditional genetic clinic models and utilize the strengths of the genetic counselor health care provider.     

A Commentary on Opportunities for the Genetic Counseling Profession through Genomic Variant Interpretation: Reflections from an Ex-Lab Rat

The genetic counseling profession continues to expand and respond to the changing landscape of genomic medicine. “Non-traditional” genetic counseling roles have become more commonplace and the transferability of the genetic counselor skill set has been widely acknowledged, particularly in genetic laboratory settings. As these expanding roles continue to mature, all genetic counselors can benefit by learning and adopting clinically relevant skills, such as genomic variant interpretation, which can be applied to direct patient care. These skills can enrich our patients’ understanding of their test results, help ensure quality patient care, and could be useful in positioning genetic counselors as critical members in the medical team as we continue to fully transition into the genomic medicine era.     

Attitudes and Practices Among Internists Concerning Genetic Testing

Many questions remain concerning whether, when, and how physicians order genetic tests, and what factors are involved in their decisions. We surveyed 220 internists from two academic medical centers about their utilization of genetic testing. Rates of genetic utilizations varied widely by disease. Respondents were most likely to have ordered tests for Factor V Leiden (16.8 %), followed by Breast/Ovarian Cancer (15.0 %). In the past 6 months, 65 % had counseled patients on genetic issues, 44 % had ordered genetic tests, 38.5 % had referred patients to a genetic counselor or geneticist, and 27.5 % had received ads from commercial labs for genetic testing. Only 4.5 % had tried to hide or disguise genetic information, and <2 % have had patients report genetic discrimination. Only 53.4 % knew of a geneticist/genetic counselor to whom to refer patients. Most rated their knowledge as very/somewhat poor concerning genetics (73.7 %) and guidelines for genetic testing (87.1 %). Most felt needs for more training on when to order tests (79 %), and how to counsel patients (82 %), interpret results (77.3 %), and maintain privacy (80.6 %). Physicians were more likely to have ordered a genetic test if patients inquired about genetic testing (p?<?.001), and if physicians had a geneticist/genetic counselor to whom to refer patients (p?<?.002), had referred patients to a geneticist/genetic counselor in the past 6 months, had more comfort counseling patients about testing (p?<?.019), counseled patients about genetics, larger practices (p?<?.032), fewer African-American patients (p?<?.027), and patients who had reported genetic discrimination (p?<?.044). In a multiple logistic regression, ordering a genetic test was associated with patients inquiring about testing, having referred patients to a geneticist/genetic counselor and knowing how to order tests. These data suggest that physicians recognize their knowledge deficits, and are interested in training. These findings have important implications for future medical practice, research, and education.     

Assessment of the Content and Process of Genetic Counseling: A Critical Review of Empirical Studies

This article reviews studies that assessed the process and content of genetic counseling communication. A systematic search of the literature was undertaken of studies that audio- or videotaped genetic counseling sessions conducted by genetics health care providers and subjected them to communication analyses. A total of 18 studies (published in 34 articles) were identified that met the eligibility criteria. Studies show that providers speak more than clients, that a large proportion of communication is biomedical rather than psychosocial and that the teaching model of genetic counseling is widely implemented. Higher levels of counselor facilitation of understanding and empathic responses, lower levels of verbal dominance (ratio of counselor to client talk) and the provision of a summary letter of the consultation are associated with more positive client outcomes. Findings from these studies should be used as an evidence base for teaching and continuing education of genetic counseling providers.     

Client Advocacy and Collaboration with Insurance and Laboratory Testing Agencies: A Case Study Illustrating Genetic Counselor Roles

Genetic counseling and the many roles a genetic counselor must assume to provide quality genetic health care are becoming increasingly complex, especially when the genetic condition is rare, and DNA testing is costly and not yet routinely used. A case study of a couple with a family history of retinoblastoma and their pursuit of DNA testing for prenatal diagnosis is presented. The case study illustrates the instrumental role of the genetic counselor in advocating for clients for genetic services such as DNA testing and in educating insurance companies in the nature and importance of such services to achieve improved client health care outcomes.     

Clinical Cardiovascular Genetic Counselors Take a Leading Role in Team-based Variant Classification

We sought to delineate the genetic test review and interpretation practices of clinical cardiovascular genetic counselors. A one-time anonymous online survey was taken by 46 clinical cardiovascular genetic counselors recruited through the National Society of Genetic Counselors Cardiovascular Special Interest Group. Nearly all (95.7%) gather additional information on variants reported on clinical genetic test reports and most (81.4%) assess the classification of such variants. Clinical cardiovascular genetic counselors typically (81.0%) classify variants in collaboration with cardiologist and/or geneticist colleagues, with the genetic counselor as the team member who is primarily responsible. Variant classification is a relatively recent (mean 3.2 years) addition to practice. Most genetic counselors learned classification skills on the job from clinical and laboratory colleagues. Recent graduates were more likely to have learned this in graduate school (p?<?0.001). Genetic counselors are motivated to take responsibility for the classification of variants because of prior experiences with variant reclassification, inconsistencies between laboratories, and incomplete laboratory reports. They are also driven by a sense of professional duty and their proximity to the clinical context. This practice represents a broadening of the skill set of clinical cardiovascular genetic counselors and a unique expertise that they contribute to the interdisciplinary teams in which they work.     

Development of a Streamlined Work Flow for Handling Patients’ Genetic Testing Insurance Authorizations

Obtaining genetic testing insurance authorizations for patients is a complex, time-involved process often requiring genetic counselor (GC) and physician involvement. In an effort to mitigate this complexity and meet the increasing number of genetic testing insurance authorization requests, GCs formed a novel partnership with an industrial engineer (IE) and a patient services associate (PSA) to develop a streamlined work flow. Eight genetics clinics and five specialty clinics at the University of Michigan were surveyed to obtain benchmarking data. Tasks needed for genetic testing insurance authorization were outlined and time-saving work flow changes were introduced including 1) creation of an Excel password-protected shared database between GCs and PSAs, used for initiating insurance authorization requests, tracking and follow-up 2) instituting the PSAs sending GCs a pre-clinic email noting each patients’ genetic testing insurance coverage 3) inclusion of test medical necessity documentation in the clinic visit summary note instead of writing a separate insurance letter and 4) PSAs development of a manual with insurance providers and genetic testing laboratories information. These work flow changes made it more efficient to request and track genetic testing insurance authorizations for patients, enhanced GCs and PSAs communication, and reduced tasks done by clinicians.     

Consumer Preferences for the Predictive Genetic Test for Alzheimer Disease

The purpose of this study was to assess consumer preferences for predictive genetic testing for Alzheimer disease in the United States. A rating conjoint analysis was conducted using an anonymous online survey distributed by Qualtrics® to a general population panel in April 2011 in the United States. The study design included three attributes: Accuracy (40 %, 80 %, and 100 %), Treatment Availability (Cure is available/Drug for symptom relief but no cure), and Anonymity (Anonymous/Not anonymous). A total of 12 scenarios were used to elicit people’s preference, assessed by an 11-point scale. The respondents also indicated their highest willingness-to-pay (WTP) for each scenario through open-ended questions. A total of 295 responses were collected over 4 days. The most important attribute for the aggregate model was Accuracy, contributing 64.73 % to the preference rating. Treatment Availability and Anonymity contributed 20.72 % and 14.59 %, respectively, to the preference rating. The median WTP for the highest-rating scenario (Accuracy 100 %, a cure is available, test result is anonymous) was $100 (mean?=?$276). The median WTP for the lowest-rating scenario (40 % accuracy, no cure but drugs for symptom relief, not anonymous) was zero (mean?=?$34). The results of this study highlight attributes people find important when making the hypothetical decision to obtain an AD genetic test. These results should be of interests to policy makers, genetic test developers and health care providers.     

Perceptions of Licensure: A Survey of Michigan Genetic Counselors

This study by the Michigan Genetic Counselor Licensure Committee is the first known published documentation of genetic counselors’ beliefs and attitudes about licensure. The response rate from genetic counselors in Michigan was 66% (41/62). Ninety-five percent of respondents were supportive of licensure. Respondents believed licensure would legitimize genetic counseling as a distinct allied healthcare profession (97.5%), increase the public’s protection (75%), and allow genetic counselors to practice independently (67%). While 45% felt licensure would increase counselor involvement in lawsuits, this did not impact licensure support (p?=?0.744). Opinions were split regarding physician supervision and ordering tests. Even though 28% favored physician supervision, there was overwhelming support for genetic counselors performing some components of genetic testing (95%) and ordering some types of genetic tests (82%) independent of a physician. Use of this survey may be helpful in other states to assess genetic counselors’ interest in licensure and for drafting legislation.     

Inherited Thrombophilia: Key Points for Genetic Counseling

With the evolution of medical genetics to focus on highly prevalent, multifactorial conditions, it is inevitable that genetic counselors will be called upon to participate in the evaluation and counseling of individuals with inherited thrombophilia. The purpose of this review is to educate the genetic counselor on key issues related to risk assessment and genetic counseling for hereditary thrombophilia. The information contained in this document is derived from an extensive review of the literature, as well as the author's personal expertise. Upon completion of this review, the genetic counselor will be able to: a) describe inherited and acquired risk factors for thrombosis, b) collect and interpret personal and family histories to assess risk related to hereditary thrombophilia, c) discuss the potential advantages and disadvantages of thrombophilia testing, including psychosocial aspects and implications for medical management, and d) identify educational and support resources for patients and families.     

Genetic counselor as a member of an outreach education team

As part of a program to improve maternal and infant health in New Jersey, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has funded seven regional consortia throughout the State. One of the goals of the Northern New Jersey Regional Consortium is to provide a comprehensive educational program for ambulatory care staff. An outreach education team was established that includes a perinatal nurse educator, a neonatal nurse educator, a nutritional counselor and a genetic counselor. Many issues in genetics can be initially addressed by the ambulatory care provider. A good understanding and awareness of the impact of genetic issues in patient care is needed to enhance the ability to recognize patients needing special services. Early assessment of possible risk for developmental disabilities can lead to appropriate comprehensive care and improved pregnancy outcome. Regular in-service programs, addressing the way heredity contributes to developmental disorders, the latest techniques used in genetics and the available management programs, can be provided. The present study is an evaluation of the effectiveness of the program.     

The Value of a Genetic Counselor: Improving Identification of Cancer Genetic Counseling Patients with Chart Review

Advances in genetics are changing cancer care and requiring institutions to maximize the unique skills of genetics professionals. The identification of genetic syndromes is vital for prevention and management of families with high cancer risks. Despite this, high risk individuals who qualify are often not referred. Genetic counselors could review oncology charts to improve identification. A genetics assessment tool developed by NCI Community Cancer Centers Program was used to perform self-assessment of the genetics program. A weekly report of all new oncology patients was provided to a genetic counselor for chart review. In 2010, 58 % of all eligible patients (n?=?152) were offered a genetics evaluation. In 2011 this improved to 70 % (n?=?167), which was a statistically significant difference, X ²(1)?=?5.13, p?=?0.02. By cancer site, ovarian cancer referrals also showed statistically significant improvement, X ²(1)?=?6.36, p?=?0.01. Breast and colon referrals were improved but not significant. Over 10 months, 129 patients were identified through the chart review program. Three were confirmed to have a genetic mutation for a hereditary cancer syndrome. An average week included review of 73 charts for 10 medical oncologists, 4 radiation oncologists, and 4 pediatric oncologists which generated 60–80 min of work for the genetic counselor. This program improved patient identification and quality, and allowed physicians to become more aware of opportunities for genetic counseling and more patients to receive genetic counseling and testing.     

Conceptualizing Genetic Counseling as Psychotherapy in the Era of Genomic Medicine

Discussions about genetic contributions to medical illness have become increasingly commonplace. Physicians and other health-care providers in all quarters of medicine, from oncology to psychiatry, routinely field questions about the genetic basis of the medical conditions they treat. Communication about genetic testing and risk also enter into these conversations, as knowledge about genetics is increasingly expected of all medical specialists. Attendant to this evolving medical landscape is some uncertainty regarding the future of the genetic counseling profession, with the potential for both increases and decreases in demand for genetic counselors being possible outcomes. This emerging uncertainty provides the opportunity to explicitly conceptualize the potentially distinct value and contributions of the genetic counselor over and above education about genetics and risk that may be provided by other health professionals. In this paper we suggest conceptualizing genetic counseling as a highly circumscribed form of psychotherapy in which effective communication of genetic information is a central therapeutic goal. While such an approach is by no means new—in 1979 Seymour Kessler explicitly described genetic counseling as a “kind of psychotherapeutic encounter,” an “interaction with a psychotherapeutic potential”—we expand on his view, and provide research evidence in support of our position. We review available evidence from process and outcome studies showing that genetic counseling is a therapeutic encounter that cannot be reduced to one where the counselor performs a simple “conduit for information” function, without losing effectiveness. We then discuss potential barriers that may have impeded greater uptake of a psychotherapeutic model of practice, and close by discussing implications for practice.     

Operationalizing the Reciprocal Engagement Model of Genetic Counseling Practice: a Framework for the Scalable Delivery of Genomic Counseling and Testing

With the advent of widespread genomic testing for diagnostic indications and disease risk assessment, there is increased need to optimize genetic counseling services to support the scalable delivery of precision medicine. Here, we describe how we operationalized the reciprocal engagement model of genetic counseling practice to develop a framework of counseling components and strategies for the delivery of genomic results. This framework was constructed based upon qualitative research with patients receiving genomic counseling following online receipt of potentially actionable complex disease and pharmacogenomics reports. Consultation with a transdisciplinary group of investigators, including practicing genetic counselors, was sought to ensure broad scope and applicability of these strategies for use with any large-scale genomic testing effort. We preserve the provision of pre-test education and informed consent as established in Mendelian/single-gene disease genetic counseling practice. Following receipt of genomic results, patients are afforded the opportunity to tailor the counseling agenda by selecting the specific test results they wish to discuss, specifying questions for discussion, and indicating their preference for counseling modality. The genetic counselor uses these patient preferences to set the genomic counseling session and to personalize result communication and risk reduction recommendations. Tailored visual aids and result summary reports divide areas of risk (genetic variant, family history, lifestyle) for each disease to facilitate discussion of multiple disease risks. Post-counseling, session summary reports are actively routed to both the patient and their physician team to encourage review and follow-up. Given the breadth of genomic information potentially resulting from genomic testing, this framework is put forth as a starting point to meet the need for scalable genetic counseling services in the delivery of precision medicine.     

Review of Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) for Prenatal and Pediatric Genetic Counselors

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is an autosomal recessive neuromuscular condition with degeneration of the anterior horn cells in the spinal column. Five SMA subtypes exist with classification dependent upon the motor milestones achieved. Study of the SMN1 (survival motor neuron) and SMN2 genes as well as the concepts of the “2?+?0” carriers, gene conversion, de novo mutations and intragenic mutations allow for a better understanding of SMA. Detailing the carrier and diagnostic testing options further deepens the genetic counselor’s knowledge of SMA. A review of care guidelines and research options is included as this information gives a patient a well-rounded view of SMA. Although SMA is most commonly associated with the SMN1 gene, a number of spinal muscular atrophies not caused by genetic changes in this gene may be included as differential diagnoses until confirmatory testing can be completed. SMA is a complex condition requiring a detailed knowledge on the genetic counselor’s part in order to explain the disorder to the patient with clarity thus facilitating increased communication and decision making guidance with the patient.     

Cystic Fibrosis Prenatal Screening in Genetic Counseling Practice: Recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors

For over a decade, prenatal screening for cystic fibrosis (CF) has been considered a model for the integration of genetic testing into routine medical practice. Data from pilot studies and public policy discourse have led to recommendations by some professional organizations that CF screening should be offered or made available to pregnant women and their partners, and to couples planning a pregnancy. It is crucial that genetic counselors gain thorough understanding of the complexities of CF and the implications of positive test results, so that they may serve as a reliable, educated referral base and resource for health care providers and their patients. While not all pregnant women will be referred for genetic counseling prior to CF carrier testing, genetic counselors often will be asked to counsel clients after they have a positive test result, or who are found to be at increased risk. Genetic counselors can play an important role in providing accurate and current information as well as support for patients informed decisions. These recommendations were created by a multicenter working group of genetic counselors with expertise in CF and are based on personal clinical experience, review of pertinent English language medical articles, and reports of expert committees. The recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does the use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care providers professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a particular client.     

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: Introduction to the Special Issue

This issue of the Journal of Genetic Counseling is devoted to direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing. The 15 articles in this special issue address practice considerations for genetic counselors and other health care professionals; the benefits and limitations of DTC genetic testing; consumer and provider attitudes towards and experience with DTC testing; and the roles and educational needs of genetic counselors and other health care providers in providing and interpreting DTC genetic testing. In this introduction to the special issue, we provide a brief background on DTC genetic testing, summarize the important contribution of the articles included in this issue, and outline the essential work that still needs to be done as genetic counselors are increasingly engaged in discussions, education, and research about DTC genetic testing.     

Medical Genetics and Genetic Counseling in Chile

In the South American Republic of Chile genetic counseling is not currently recognized as an independent clinical discipline, and in general is provided by physicians with training in clinical genetics. At present only one genetic counselor and 28 clinical geneticists practice in this country of over 16 million inhabitants. Pediatric dysmorphology constitutes the primary area of practice in clinical genetics. Although the country has a universal health care system and an adequate level of health care, genetic conditions are not considered a health care priority and there is a lack of clinical and laboratory resources designated for clinical genetics services. Multiple educational, cultural and financial barriers exist to the growth and development of genetic counseling services in Chile. However, during the last 10 years increased awareness of the importance of identifying individuals at risk for inherited cancer syndromes led to growing interest in the practice of cancer genetics.     

Twin Gestation Pregnancies: Genetic Counseling and Testing Experience

We report on the prenatal genetic counseling and testing experience in 343 pregnancies with twin or higher multiple gestations. By self-report, 8% (27/343) parents of these pregnancies reported meeting with a genetic counselor, and 23% (79/343) elected prenatal genetic testing. The most common testing procedures elected were maternal serum analyte screening and amniocentesis to identify fetuses with aneuploidy or neural tube defects. Use of prenatal genetic testing was correlated with advanced maternal age. No association was found between use of genetic testing and use of OI/ART or the length of time needed to conceive. Forty percent (11/27) of those who met with a genetic counselor opted to decline prenatal testing/screening. These data suggest that although clients with multiple gestation pregnancies would likely benefit from genetic counseling, many are not availing themselves of this service. Implications of these data for the genetic counseling profession are discussed.