Couple-based expanded carrier screening provided by general practitioners to couples in the Dutch general population: psychological outcomes and reproductive intentions.

PURPOSE: The aim of expanded preconception carrier screening (ECS) is to inform any couple wishing to conceive about their chances of having children with severe autosomal or X-linked recessive conditions. Responsible implementation of ECS as reproductive genetic screening in routine care requires assessment of benefits and harms. We examined the psychological outcomes of couple-based ECS for 50 autosomal recessive (AR) conditions provided by general practitioners (GPs) to couples from the Dutch general population. METHODS: Dutch GPs invited 4,295 women aged 18-40. We examined anxiety (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, STAI-6), worry, decisional conflict (DCS) over time in participants declining GP counseling or attending GP counseling with/without testing. RESULTS: One hundred ninety couples participated; 130 attended counseling, of whom 117 proceeded with testing. No carrier couples were identified. Before counseling, worry (median 6.0) and anxiety (mean 30-34) were low and lower than the population reference (36.4), although some individuals reported increased anxiety or worry. At follow-up, test acceptors reported less anxiety than test decliners (mean 29 vs. 35); differences in anxiety after testing compared to before counseling were not meaningful. Most participants (90%) were satisfied with their decision (not) to undergo testing. CONCLUSION: Some individuals reported temporarily clinically relevant distress. Overall, the psychological outcomes are acceptable and no barrier to population-wide implementation.

Phenotype of genetically confirmed Silver-Russell syndrome beyond childhood.

BACKGROUND: Silver-Russell syndrome is an imprinting disorder that restricts growth, resulting in short adult stature that may be ameliorated by treatment. Approximately 50% of patients have loss of methylation of the imprinting control region (H19/IGF2:IG-DMR) on 11p15.5 and 5%-10% have maternal uniparental disomy of chromosome 7. Most published research focuses on the childhood phenotype. Our aim was to describe the phenotypic characteristics of older patients with SRS. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 33 individuals with a confirmed molecular diagnosis of SRS aged 13 years or above were carefully phenotyped. RESULTS: The median age of the cohort was 29.6 years; 60.6% had a height SD score (SDS) ≤-2 SDS despite 70% having received growth hormone treatment. Relative macrocephaly, feeding difficulties and a facial appearance typical of children with SRS were no longer discriminatory diagnostic features. In those aged ≥18 years, impaired glucose tolerance in 25%, hypertension in 33% and hypercholesterolaemia in 52% were noted. While 9/33 accessed special education support, university degrees were completed in 40.0% (>21 years). There was no significant correlation between quality of life and height SDS. 9/25 were parents and none of the 17 offsprings had SRS. CONCLUSION: Historical treatment regimens for SRS were not sufficient for normal adult growth and further research to optimise treatment is justified. Clinical childhood diagnostic scoring systems are not applicable to patients presenting in adulthood and SRS diagnosis requires molecular confirmation. Metabolic ill-health warrants further investigation but SRS is compatible with a normal quality of life including normal fertility in many cases.

Is it acceptable to contact an anonymous egg donor to facilitate diagnostic genetic testing for the donor-conceived child?

We discuss a case where medically optimal investigations of health problems in a donor-conceived child would require their egg donor to participate in genetic testing. We argue that it would be justified to contact the egg donor to ask whether she would consider this, despite her indicating on a historical consent form that she did not wish to take part in future research and that she did not wish to be informed if she was found to be a carrier of a 'harmful inherited condition'. We suggest that we cannot conjecture what her current answer might be if, by participating in clinical genetic testing, she might help reach a diagnosis for the donor-conceived child. At the point that she made choices regarding future contact, it was not yet evident that the interests of the donor-conceived child might be compromised by her answers, as it was not foreseen that the egg donor's genome might one day have the potential to enable diagnosis for this child. Fertility consent forms tend to be conceptualised as representing incontrovertible historical boundaries, but we argue that rapid evolution in genomic practice means that consent in such cases is better seen as an ongoing and dynamic process. It cannot be possible to compel the donor to aid in the diagnosis of the donor-conceived child, but she should be given the opportunity to do so.

Limitations and Pitfalls of Using Family Letters to Communicate Genetic Risk: a Qualitative Study with Patients and Healthcare Professionals.

European genetic testing guidelines recommend that healthcare professionals (HCPs) discuss the familial implications of any test with a patient and offer written material to help them share the information with family members. Giving patients these "family letters" to alert any relatives of their risk has become part of standard practice and has gone relatively unquestioned over the years. Communication with at-risk relatives will become an increasingly pressing issue as mainstream and routine practice incorporates broad genome tests and as the number of findings potentially relevant to relatives increases. This study therefore explores problems around the use of family letters to communicate about genetic risk. We conducted 16 focus groups with 80 HCPs, and 35 interviews with patients, recruited from across the UK. Data were analyzed thematically and we constructed four themes: 1) HCPs writing family letters: how to write them and why?, 2) Patients' issues with handing out family letters, 3) Dissemination becomes an uncontrolled form of communication, and 4) When the relative has the letter, is the patient's and HCP's duty discharged? We conclude by suggesting alternative and supplementary methods of communication, for example through digital tools, and propose that in comparison to communication by family letter, direct contact by HCPs might be a more appropriate and successful option.

Predictive Genetic Testing of Children for Adult-Onset Conditions: Negotiating Requests with Parents.

Healthcare professionals (HCPs) regularly face requests from parents for predictive genetic testing of children for adult-onset conditions. Little is known about how HCPs handle these test requests, given that guidelines recommend such testing is deferred to adulthood unless there is medical benefit to testing before that time. Our study explored the process of decision-making between HCPs and parents. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 34 HCPs in 8 regional genetic services across the UK, and data were thematically analysed. We found that instead of saying 'yes' or 'no' to such requests, many HCPs framed the consultation as an opportunity to negotiate the optimal time of testing. This, they argued, facilitates parents' considered decision-making, since parents' eventual decisions after requesting a test was often to defer testing their child. In cases where parents' requests remained a sustained wish, most HCPs said they would agree to test, concluding that not testing would not serve the child's wider best interest. As a strategy for determining the child's best interest and for facilitating shared decision-making, we recommend that HCPs re-frame requests for testing from parents as a discussion about the optimal time of testing for adult-onset disease.

Healthcare professionals' and patients' perspectives on consent to clinical genetic testing: moving towards a more relational approach.

BACKGROUND: This paper proposes a refocusing of consent for clinical genetic testing, moving away from an emphasis on autonomy and information provision, towards an emphasis on the virtues of healthcare professionals seeking consent, and the relationships they construct with their patients. METHODS: We draw on focus groups with UK healthcare professionals working in the field of clinical genetics, as well as in-depth interviews with patients who have sought genetic testing in the UK's National Health Service (data collected 2013-2015). We explore two aspects of consent: first, how healthcare professionals consider the act of 'consenting' patients; and second how these professional accounts, along with the accounts of patients, deepen our understanding of the consent process. RESULTS: Our findings suggest that while healthcare professionals working in genetic medicine put much effort into ensuring patients' understanding about their impending genetic test, they acknowledge, and we show, that patients can still leave genetic consultations relatively uninformed. Moreover, we show how placing emphasis on the informational aspect of genetic testing is not always reflective of, or valuable to, patients' decision-making. Rather, decision-making is socially contextualised - also based on factors outside of information provision. CONCLUSIONS: A more collaborative on-going consent process, grounded in virtue ethics and values of honesty, openness and trustworthiness, is proposed.

Health-care professionals' responsibility to patients' relatives in genetic medicine: a systematic review and synthesis of empirical research.

PURPOSE: The extent of the responsibility of health-care professionals (HCPs) to ensure that patients' relatives are told of their risk is unclear. Current international guidelines take confidentiality to the individual patient as the default position, but some suggest that disclosure could be default and genetic information could be conceptualized as familial. METHODS: Our systematic review and synthesis of 17 studies explored the attitudes of HCPs, patients, and the public regarding the extent of HCPs' responsibility to relatives with respect to disclosure. RESULTS: Health-care professionals generally felt a responsibility to patients' relatives but perceived a variety of reasons why it would be difficult to act on this responsibility. Public/patient views were more wide-ranging. Participants identified several competing and overlapping arguments for and against HCP disclosure: guidelines do not permit/mandate it, privacy, medical benefit, impact on family dynamics, quality of communication, and respecting autonomy. CONCLUSION: We argue that HCPs can sometimes share genetic information without breaching confidentiality and that they could factor into their considerations the potential harm to family dynamics of nondisclosure. However, we need more nuanced research about their responsibilities to relatives, particularly as genomic tests are used more frequently in clinical practice.Genet Med 18 4, 290-301.

What results to disclose, when, and who decides? Healthcare professionals' views on prenatal chromosomal microarray analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This study explored the views of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in the UK about what information should be disclosed, when; and whether women/parents should be given a choice as to what they wish to know. METHODS: Q-methodology was used to assess the views of 40 HCPs (genetic HCPs, fetal medicine experts, lab-scientists). RESULTS: Most participants agreed that variants of unknown clinical significance should not be disclosed. Participants were divided between those who considered variants of uncertain clinical significance helpful for parents and clinicians, and those who considered them harmful. Although recognising the potential disadvantages of disclosing risks for adult-onset conditions, participants thought it would be difficult to withhold such information once identified. Participants largely supported some parental involvement in determining which results should be returned. Most participants believed that information obtained via CMA testing in pregnancy should either be disclosed during pregnancy, or not at all. CONCLUSION: HCPs taking part in the study largely believed that variants that will inform the management of the pregnancy, or are relevant to other family members, should be reported. Recent UK guidelines, published after this research was completed, reflect these opinions.

'Is this knowledge mine and nobody else's? I don't feel that.' Patient views about consent, confidentiality and information-sharing in genetic medicine.

In genetic medicine, a patient's diagnosis can mean their family members are also at risk, raising a question about how consent and confidentiality should function in clinical genetics. This question is particularly pressing when it is unclear whether a patient has shared information. Conventionally, healthcare professionals view confidentiality at an individual level and 'disclosure without consent' as the exception, not the rule. The relational joint account model, by contrast, conceptualises genetic information as confidential at the familial level and encourages professionals to take disclosure as the default position. In this study, we interviewed 33 patients about consent and confidentiality and analysed data thematically. Our first theme showed that although participants thought of certain aspects of genetic conditions--for example, the way they affect day-to-day health--as somewhat personal, they perceived genetic information--for example, the mutation in isolation--as familial. Most thought these elements were separable and thought family members had a right to know the latter, identifying a broad range of harms that would justify disclosure. Our second theme illustrated that participants nonetheless had some concerns about what, if any, implications there would be of professionals treating such information as familial and they emphasised the importance of being informed about the way their information would be shared. Based on these results, we recommend that professionals take disclosure as the default position, but make clear that they will treat genetic information as familial during initial consultations and address any concerns therein.

Defining and managing incidental findings in genetic and genomic practice.

The rapidly declining costs and increasing speeds of whole-genome analysis mean that genetic testing is undergoing a shift from targeted approaches to broader ones that look at the entire genome. As whole-genome technologies gain widespread use, questions about the management of so-called incidental findings-those unrelated to the question being asked-need urgent consideration. In this review, we bring together current understanding and arguments about (1) appropriate terminology, (2) the determination of clinical utility and when to disclose incidental findings, (3) the differences in management and disclosure in clinical, research and commercial contexts and (4) ethical and practical issues about familial implications and recontacting those tested. We recommend that greater international consensus is developed around the disclosure and management of incidental findings, with particular attention to when, and how, less clear-cut results should be communicated. We suggest that there is no single term that captures all the issues around these kinds of findings and that different terms may, therefore, need to be used in different settings. We also encourage the use of clear consent processes, but suggest that the absence of consent should not always preclude disclosure. Finally, we recommend further research to identify ways to implement the use of a genome output as a resource, accessible over time, to facilitate appropriate disclosure and recontact when the significance of a previously unclear incidental finding is clarified.

Medical ethics and law: assessing the core curriculum.

The Institute of Medical Ethics (IME) has produced a guide to the assessment of medical ethics and law (MEL) in UK medical schools which is available on-line. It complements the work which was carried out in 2010 to up-date the MEL consensus statement on what should be considered core content. The guide aims to provide practical help for teachers on what, when and how to assess medical students' learning. The briefing paper gives a background introduction to the guide, outlines its purpose and plans for future work.

Genetic medicine and incidental findings: it is more complicated than deciding whether to disclose or not.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to explore the clinical management of incidental findings. Advances in the speed and sensitivity of genetic technologies have not only improved the diagnostic rate but also result in an increase in unanticipated diagnoses. Recent debate on such "incidental findings" has considered whether or not to actively search for and, then, disclose incidental findings. In our experience, many incidental findings need to be investigated in family members before their clinical significance can be assessed. This adds complexity to the debate about disclosure. METHODS: Using anonymized clinical examples, we illustrate the downstream implications when a result reveals an incidental abnormality of potential clinical significance that is not related to the reasons for doing the test. RESULTS: Our examples illustrate that the determination of clinical significance may require participation of family members in both testing and surveillance. CONCLUSION: The need to investigate multiple relatives in order to decide whether or not a finding is clinically significant has implications for consent and disclosure practices. Communication with, and care for, relatives who have no reason to suspect particular diagnoses is a challenge for any health-care service. These costs also need to be taken into account as genetic testing enters mainstream medicine.

"Women's bodies are shops": beliefs about transactional sex and implications for understanding gender power and HIV prevention in Tanzania.

Although transactional sex has been linked to undesirable sexual health outcomes, there is a lack of clarity as to the meaning of the practice, which appears to extend beyond behaviors related to women's economic circumstances. This article explored the perspectives of parents and unmarried young people on motivations for, and beliefs about, transactional sex in rural Tanzania using an ethnographic research design. Data collection involved 17 focus groups and 46 in-depth interviews with young people aged 14-24 years and parents/caregivers. Transactional sex was widely accepted by both parents and young people. Male parents equated sexual exchange to buying meat from a butcher and interpreted women's demand for exchange before sex with personal power. Young men referred to transactional sex as the easiest way to get a woman to satisfy their sexual desires while also proving their masculinity. Young women perceived themselves as lucky to be created women as they could exploit their sexuality for pleasure and material gain. They felt men were stupid for paying for "goods" (vagina) they could not take away. Mothers were in agreement with their daughters. Although young women saw exploitation of the female body in positive terms, they were also aware of the health risks but ascribed these to bad luck. Interventions aimed at tackling transactional sex in the interests of women's empowerment and as a strategy for HIV prevention need to understand the cultural beliefs associated with the practice that may make it thrive despite the known risks.

Parental control and monitoring of young people's sexual behaviour in rural North-Western Tanzania: implications for sexual and reproductive health interventions.

BACKGROUND: Parenting through control and monitoring has been found to have an effect on young people's sexual behaviour. There is a dearth of literature from sub-Saharan Africa on this subject. This paper examines parental control and monitoring and the implications of this on young people's sexual decision making in a rural setting in North-Western Tanzania. METHODS: This study employed an ethnographic research design. Data collection involved 17 focus group discussions and 46 in-depth interviews conducted with young people aged 14-24 years and parents/carers of young people within this age-group. Thematic analysis was conducted with the aid of NVIVO 7 software. RESULTS: Parents were motivated to control and monitor their children's behaviour for reasons such as social respectability and protecting them from undesirable sexual and reproductive health (SRH) outcomes. Parental control and monitoring varied by family structure, gender, schooling status, a young person's contribution to the economic running of the family and previous experience of a SRH outcome such as unplanned pregnancy. Children from single parent families reported that they received less control compared to those from both parent families. While a father's presence in the family seemed important in controlling the activities of young people, a mother's did not have a similar effect. Girls especially those still schooling received more supervision compared to boys. Young women who had already had unplanned pregnancy were not supervised as closely as those who hadn't. Parents employed various techniques to control and monitor their children's sexual activities. CONCLUSIONS: Despite parents making efforts to control and monitor their young people's sexual behaviour, they are faced with several challenges (e.g. little time spent with their children) which make it difficult for them to effectively monitor them. There is a need for interventions such as parenting skills building that might enable parents to improve their relationships with children. This would equip parents with the appropriate skills for positive guidance and monitoring of their children and avoid inappropriate parenting behaviour. As much as parents focus their attention on their school going daughters, there is a need to also remember the out-of-school young people as they are also vulnerable to adverse SRH outcomes.

Ambulatory oxygen: why do COPD patients not use their portable systems as prescribed? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with COPD on long term oxygen therapy frequently do not adhere to their prescription, and they frequently do not use their ambulatory oxygen systems as intended. Reasons for this lack of adherence are not known. The aim of this study was to obtain in-depth information about perceptions and use of prescribed ambulatory oxygen systems from patients with COPD to inform ambulatory oxygen design, prescription and management. METHODS: A qualitative design was used, involving semi-structured face-to-face interviews informed by a grounded theory approach. Twenty-seven UK community-dwelling COPD patients using NHS prescribed ambulatory systems were recruited. Ambulatory oxygen systems comprised cylinders weighing 3.4 kg, a shoulder bag and nasal cannulae. RESULTS: Participants reported that they: received no instruction on how to use ambulatory oxygen; were uncertain of the benefits; were afraid the system would run out while they were using it (due to lack of confidence in the cylinder gauge); were embarrassed at being seen with the system in public; and were unable to carry the system because of the cylinder weight. The essential role of carers was also highlighted, as participants with no immediate carers did not use ambulatory oxygen outside the house. CONCLUSIONS: These participants highlighted previously unreported problems that prevented them from using ambulatory oxygen as prescribed. Our novel findings point to: concerns with the lack of specific information provision; the perceived unreliability of the oxygen system; important carer issues surrounding managing and using ambulatory oxygen equipment. All of these issues, as well as previously reported problems with system weight and patient embarrassment, should be addressed to improve adherence to ambulatory oxygen prescription and enhance the physical and social benefits of maintaining mobility in this patient group. Increased user involvement in both system development and service provision planning, could have avoided many of the difficulties highlighted by this study.