A systematic review of interventions to provide genetics education for primary care

Abstract

BackgroundAt least 10 % of patients seen in primary care are said to have a condition in which genetics has an influence. However, patients at risk of genetic disease may not be recognised, while those who seek advice may not be referred or managed appropriately. Primary care practitioners lack knowledge of genetics and genetic testing relevant for daily practice and feel inadequate to deliver genetic services. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate genetics educational interventions in the context of primary care.MethodsFollowing the process for systematic reviews developed by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, we conducted a search of five relevant electronic databases. Primary research papers were eligible for inclusion if they included data on outcomes of interventions regarding genetics education for primary care practitioners. The results from each paper were coded and grouped under themes.ResultsEleven studies were included in the review. The five major themes identified inductively (post hoc) were: prior experience, changes in confidence, changes in knowledge, changes in practice, satisfaction and feedback. In five of the studies, knowledge of practitioners was improved following the educational programmes, but this tended to be in specific topic areas, while practitioner confidence improved in six studies. However, there was little apparent change to practice.ConclusionsThere are insufficient studies of relevant quality to inform educational interventions in genetics for primary care practitioners. Educational initiatives should be assessed using changes in practice, as well as in confidence and knowledge, to determine if they are effective in causing significant changes in practice in genetic risk assessment and appropriate management of patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0483-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research Consortium: Integrating Genomic Sequencing in Diverse and Medically Underserved Populations

“…24 Yet, these educational programs might not significantly change practice. 25 Patients and researchers face obstacles to the implementation of genomic medicine. Barriers to participation in genomic research studies include lack of community engagement, mistrust on the part of the patient, logistical barriers, and privacy and discrimination concerns.…”

“…

on behalf of the CSER consortium, Sharon E. Plon, 25 and Gail P. Jarvik 1,31, * The Clinical Sequencing Evidence-Generating Research (CSER) consortium, now in its second funding cycle, is investigating the effectiveness of integrating genomic (exome or genome) sequencing into the clinical care of diverse and medically underserved individuals in a variety of healthcare settings and disease states. The consortium comprises a coordinating center, six funded extramural clinical projects, and an ongoing National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project.

…”

Implementing genetic education in primary care: the Gen-Equip programme

“…The majority of other educational projects to enhance understanding of genetics in primary care have been based in a single country, as was evidenced by the studies included in a systematic review (Paneque et al, 2016). For this and reasons of funding and travel and time commitment needed, access to genetics education by primary care practitioners was limited.…”

“…As a foundation for the project, we undertook a systematic review of genetic education for primary care (Paneque et al, 2016). Using the results of that review and two workshops attended by partners of the project and key stakeholders (from primary care and public health), a genetics education curriculum for European professionals was prepared (www.…”

Role of the general practitioner in the care of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: General practitioner and patient perspectives

“…Therefore, the expectation of patients carrying a BRCA1/2 mutation must be met by including GPs more efficiently in the BRCA1/2 care process and providing specific training to GPs. Previous studies have shown the effectiveness and ease of establishing training in oncogenetics (Houwink et al, 2014;Scheuner et al, 2014;Watson et al, 2001) or rare genetic diseases (Carroll et al, 2009;Paneque et al, 2016) for GPs.…”