Family communication following a diagnosis of myotonic dystrophy: To tell or not to tell?

Family communication about genetic information enables informed medical and reproductive decision-making. The literature suggests that a significant proportion of genetically at-risk family members remain uninformed about genetic risk information as a result of non-disclosure. This study explored the experiences of New Zealand families communicating about a diagnosis of type 1 myotonic dystrophy (DM1). Eligible individuals were identified and recruited from the New Zealand (NZ) MD Prev study, a nationwide study which aimed to determine the prevalence, impact, and costs of genetic muscle disorders across the lifespan. Twelve qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 participants. The findings demonstrate diversity among and within families, with several distinct family narratives described. Most participants reported a motivation to tell relatives about their diagnosis to promote autonomy. Women were pivotal throughout communication processes and this was often tied to the concept of maternal responsibility and a desire to promote relatives' reproductive autonomy. The diagnosis of DM1 and the subsequent family communication decisions altered relationships for many, with both positive and negative impacts described. The findings demonstrate that individuals require time to explore the impact of a diagnosis of DM1 on self, family and intimate partner relationships to anticipate unique communication challenges. Genetic counselors can use these findings to inform their approach to counseling families with DM1. Longitudinal genetic counseling may be beneficial as a way to provide individuals with life stage specific support as they communicate with their relatives about a diagnosis of DM1.

Genetic Counsellors and Private Practice: Professional Turbulence and Common Values.

Genetic counsellors face tensions between past and future identities: between established values and goals, and a broadening scope of settings and activities. This study examines the advent of genetic counsellors in private practice in Australia and New Zealand from the perspectives of the small numbers working in this sector and those who have only worked in public practice. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 16 genetic counsellors who had experience in private practice, and 14 genetic counsellors without private sector experience. Results demonstrated that circumstantial and personal factors can mitigate the challenges experienced and the amount of support desired by those who had established a private practice, and those who were employed by private companies. Notably, most participants with private sector experience perceived themselves to be viewed negatively by other genetic counsellors. Most participants without private sector experience expressed concern that the challenges they believed genetic counsellors face in private practice may impact service quality, but wished to address such concerns by providing appropriate support. Together, our results reinforce that participants in private and public sectors are strong advocates for peer support, multidisciplinary team work, and professional development. These core values, and seeking understanding of different circumstances and support needs, will enable genetic counsellors in different sectors to move forward together. Our results suggest supports that may be acted upon by members of the profession, professional groups, and training programs, in Australia, New Zealand, and overseas.

"It's about having the choice": stakeholder perceptions of population-based genetic carrier screening for fragile X syndrome.

This project explored, the views of key stakeholders regarding population-based genetic carrier screening for fragile X syndrome (FXS). Interviews and focus groups were conducted with healthcare providers, relatives of individuals with FXS and members of the general population. Data were transcribed verbatim and coded into themes. 188 individuals took part in this study. Perceived benefits of carrier screening included: learning the risk of having a child with FXS; learning the risk of fragile X-associated primary ovarian insufficiency; and the opportunity for carriers to access reproductive options. Concerns included: the emotional impact of screening and receiving a carrier result; the predictive testing nature of the carrier test with respect to fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome; potential confusion created by receiving an intermediate result; and implications of genetic screening for society. Overall, population-based genetic carrier screening was perceived to be acceptable provided it is optional and offered at an appropriate stage of life. With the support of the participants to promote individual choice by offering a population-based carrier screening program for FXS, it is essential to carefully consider how screening might be offered in order to ensure broad accessibility and facilitation of decision-making.

Educating genetic counselors in Australia-developing a masters program.

In 2005 a publication about genetic counseling training in Australia recommended that a 2 year Masters program be established to better equip Australian genetic counselors with increased clinical skills and genetic knowledge (Sahhar et al. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 14(4), 283-294, 2005). A 2 year Masters program, it was argued, would increase the possibility of international reciprocity, thus increasing the employment opportunities for Australian trained genetic counselors overseas. In 2008 the first 2 year professional Masters program in Australia began at the University of Melbourne. The model for how this was achieved is discussed, along with the impact of the competencies developed by the Human Genetics Society of Australasia (Australia and New Zealand), on program evolution, teaching styles and clinical supervision. The principal challenges in developing the Masters program are explored and initiatives specific to SE Asia are discussed.

"It's something I need to consider": decisions about carrier screening for fragile X syndrome in a population of non-pregnant women.

Population carrier screening for fragile X syndrome can provide women with information about their risk of having a child with fragile X syndrome and their risk of fragile X-associated primary ovarian insufficiency and fragile X-associated tremor ataxia syndrome. Few studies have explored women's decisions when offered carrier screening for fragile X syndrome. Interviews were conducted with 31 women who participated in a pilot study offering carrier screening to non-pregnant women. A qualitative approach was used to gain an in-depth understanding of women's experiences and examine their decision-making processes, including women who were tested and those who decided not to be tested. The decision-making process occurred in two phases. In the first phase, the participant's reproductive stage of life and experience with illness and disability were major factors influencing whether she would consider screening. In the second phase of decision-making, participants' perceptions of the value of knowing their carrier status was the most notable factor for influencing whether a woman actually had the carrier test. Some women appreciated having time for deliberation and those who were tested did not express regret about their decision. Our findings support offering carrier screening for fragile X syndrome to non-pregnant women and suggest that women from the general population will have specific informational and counseling needs when offered carrier testing. This study highlights the unique challenges encountered by women from the general population when making a decision about testing for fragile X syndrome carrier status and illustrates the importance of understanding how women make decisions.

A model for offering carrier screening for fragile X syndrome to nonpregnant women: results from a pilot study.

PURPOSE: To develop a model of offering population carrier screening for fragile X syndrome to nonpregnant women in primary care, using a program evaluation framework. METHODS: A three-phase approach included: (I) needs assessment exploring staff and client attitudes, and informing development of educational materials, questionnaires and protocols; (II) offering screening to women, with questionnaires at baseline (Q1) and another (Q2) 1-month later; (III) genetic counseling for test-positive women and interviews with a subgroup of participants. RESULTS: Of 338 volunteering for Phase II, 94% completed Q1, 59% completed Q2, and 20% (N = 65) chose testing revealing one premutation carrier and three gray zone results; 31 women were interviewed. Tested women had more positive attitudes toward screening (Q1: P < 0.001; Q2: P < 0.001) compared with untested, although there was no significant difference in mean knowledge scores or anxiety. Women generally supported being offered prepregnancy screening; however, reasons against being tested included: not currently planning a family; perceiving benefits of screening as unimportant; and having to return for testing. CONCLUSION: This is the first prospective study exploring informed decision-making for fragile X syndrome carrier screening, using a thorough process of consultation, with no apparent harms identified. It provides a model for development of future genetic screening programs.

Genetics, Insurance and Professional Practice: Survey of the Australasian Clinical Genetics Workforce.

In Australia and New Zealand, by contrast with much of the developed world, insurance companies can use genetic test results to refuse cover or increase premiums for mutually-rated insurance products, including life, income protection and disability insurance. Genetics professionals regularly discuss insurance implications with clients and report the issue as a clinical challenge, yet no studies have examined clinical practices or opinions. This study surveyed genetic counsellors and clinical geneticists from Australia and New Zealand to (i) investigate variability in professional practice across the Australasian clinical genetic workforce relating to the insurance implications of genetic testing, and (ii) ascertain views regarding current regulation of the issue. There was considerable variability in training and clinical policies, especially around the communication of insurance implications. Almost half of participants reported receiving no training on the insurance implications of genetic testing, and almost 40% were unsure whether they could adequately advise clients. A number of deficits in professional knowledge and understanding of the issue were identified. Widespread concerns regarding regulation of this area were reported, with < 10% of Australian participants considering current Australian regulations as adequate to protect clients from genetic discrimination. The findings from this study highlight scope for greater education, consistency and professional training on the issue of genetics and insurance in Australasia, and strong agreement about the need for regulatory reform.

Communicating microarray results of uncertain clinical significance in consultation summary letters and implications for practice.

Letter-writing is an integral practice for genetic health professionals. In Victoria, Australia, patients with a chromosomal variant of uncertain clinical significance (VUS) referred to a clinical geneticist (CG) for evaluation receive consultation summary letters. While communication of uncertainty has been explored in research to some extent, little has focused on how uncertainty is communicated within consultation letters. We aimed to develop a multi-layered understanding of the ways in which CGs communicate diagnostic uncertainty in consultation summary letters. We used theme-oriented discourse analysis of 49 consultation summary letters and thematic analysis of a focus group involving eight CGs. Results showed that CGs have become more confident in their description of VUS as 'contributing factors' to patients' clinical features, but remain hesitant to assign definitive causality. CGs displayed strong epistemic stance when discussing future technological improvements to provide hope and minimise potentially disappointing outcomes for patients and families. CGs reported feeling overwhelmed by their workload associated with increasing numbers of patients with VUS, and this has led to a reduction in the number of review appointments offered over time. This study provides a rich description of the content and process of summary letters discussing VUS. Our findings have implications for letter-writing and workforce management. Furthermore, these findings may be of relevance to VUS identified by genomic sequencing in clinical practice.

"It gives them more options": preferences for preconception genetic carrier screening for fragile X syndrome in primary healthcare.

This study aims to explore stakeholder views about offering population-based genetic carrier screening for fragile X syndrome. A qualitative study using interviews and focus groups with stakeholders was undertaken to allow for an in-depth exploration of views and perceptions about practicalities of, and strategies for, offering carrier screening for fragile X syndrome to the general population in healthcare settings. A total of 188 stakeholders took part including healthcare providers (n = 81), relatives of people with fragile X syndrome (n = 29), and members of the general community (n = 78). The importance of raising community awareness about screening and providing appropriate support for carriers was emphasized. There was a preference for preconception carrier screening and for providing people with the opportunity to make an informed decision about screening. Primary care was highlighted as a setting which would ensure screening is accessible; however, challenges of offering screening in primary care were identified including time to discuss screening, knowledge about the test and possible outcomes, and the health professionals' approach to offering screening. With the increasing availability of genetic carrier tests, it is essential that research now focuses on evaluating approaches for the delivery of carrier screening programs. Primary healthcare is perceived as an appropriate setting through which to access the target population, and raising awareness is essential to making genetic screening more accessible to the general community.

"It's good to know": experiences of gene identification and result disclosure in familial epilepsies.

Recognition of the role of genetics in the epilepsies has increased dramatically, impacting on clinical practice across many epilepsy syndromes. There is limited research investigating the impact of gene identification on individuals and families with epilepsy. While research has focused on the impact of delivering genetic information to families at the time of diagnosis in genetic diseases more broadly, little is known about how genetic results in epileptic diseases influences people's lives many years after it has been conveyed. This study used qualitative methods to explore the experience of receiving a genetic result in people with familial epilepsy. Interviews were conducted with individuals with familial epilepsies in whom the underlying genetic mutation had been identified. Recorded interviews underwent thematic analysis. 20 individuals from three families with different epilepsy syndromes and causative genes were interviewed. Multiple generations within families were studied. The mean time from receiving the genetic result prior to interview was 10.9 years (range 5-14 years). Three major themes were identified: 1) living with epilepsy: an individual's experience of the severity of epilepsy in their family influenced their view. 2) Clinical utility of the test: participants expressed varying reactions to receiving a genetic result. While for some it provided helpful information and relief, others were not surprised by the finding given the familial context. Some valued the use of genetic information for reproductive decision-making, particularly in the setting of severely affected family members. While altruistic reasons for participating in genetic research were discussed, participants emphasised the benefit of participation to them and their families. 3) 'Talking about the family genes': individuals reported poor communication between family members about their epilepsy and its genetic implications. The results provide important insights into the family experience of genetic epilepsies and communication within families. This information can be used to inform the development of guidelines for genetic result disclosure and genetic counselling for individuals and families with epilepsies.

Connecting patients, researchers and clinical genetics services: the experiences of participants in the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study (AOCS).

Population-based genetic research may produce information that has clinical implications for participants and their family. Researchers notify participants or their next of kin (NoK) about the availability of genetic information via a notification letter; however, many subsequently do not contact a family cancer centre (FCC) to clarify their genetic status. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine research participants' experience of receiving a notification letter and the factors that influenced contact with an FCC. Twenty-five semi-structured interviews were conducted with research participants (n=10) or their NoK (n=15) who had received a notification letter following participation in the Australian Ovarian Cancer Study. There were a number of factors which impacted participants' access to genetic counselling at an FCC. Some participants had unmet information and support needs, which were addressed by their participation in this psychosocial interview study. Recruitment and participation in this study therefore inadvertently increased a number of participants' intention to contact an FCC. For others, participation in this study facilitated access to an FCC. Recommendations are proposed regarding future notification as well as implications for clinical practice. An approach that also provides opportunity to address research participants' support and informational needs before contacting a clinical genetics service as well as practical guidance for accessing genetic services would facilitate timely and smooth access for research participants who are interested in following up clinically relevant genetic test results.