The knowledge value-chain of genetic counseling for breast cancer: an empirical assessment of prediction and communication processes.

The aim of this paper is twofold: to analyze the genetic counseling process for breast cancer with a theoretical knowledge transfer lens and to compare generalists, medical specialists, and genetic counselors with regards to their genetic counseling practices. This paper presents the genetic counseling process occurring within a chain of value-adding activities of four main stages describing health professionals' clinical practices: (1) evaluation, (2) investigation, (3) information, and (4) decision. It also presents the results of a cross-sectional study based on a Canadian medical doctors and genetic counselors survey (n = 176) realized between July 2012 and March 2013. The statistical exercise included descriptive statistics, one-way ANOVA and post-hoc tests. The results indicate that even though all types of health professionals are involved in the entire process of genetic counseling for breast cancer, genetic counselors are more involved in the evaluation of breast cancer risk, while medical doctors are more active in the decision toward breast cancer risk management strategies. The results secondly demonstrate the relevance and the key role of genetic counselors in the care provided to women at-risk of familial breast cancer. This paper presents an integrative framework to understand the current process of genetic counseling for breast cancer in Canada, and to shed light on how and where health professionals contribute to the process. It also offers a starting point for assessing clinical practices in genetic counseling in order to establish more clearly where and to what extent efforts should be undertaken to implement future genetic services.

Medical genetic counseling for breast cancer in primary care: a synthesis of major determinants of physicians' practices in primary care settings.

OBJECTIVES: This paper aims to identify relevant potential predictors of medical genetic counseling for breast cancer (MGC-BC) in primary care and to develop a comprehensive questionnaire to study MGC-BC. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted to identify the predictors of MGC-BC among primary care physicians. Relevant articles were identified in selected databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, ISI Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Cochrane CENTRAL) and 4 selected relevant electronic journals. RESULTS: An inductive analysis of the 193 quantitatively tested variables, conducted by 3 researchers, showed that 6 conceptual categories of determinants, namely (1) demographic, (2) organizational, (3) experiential, (4) professional, (5) psychological, and (6) cognitive, influence MGC-BC practices. CONCLUSION: There is a scarcity of literature addressing the medical behavior determinants of MGC-BC. Future research is needed to identify effective strategies put into action to support the integration of MGC-BC in primary care medical practices and routines. However, our results shed light on 2 levels of actions that could improve genetic counseling services in primary care: (1) medical training and educational efforts emphasizing family history collection (individual level), and (2) clarification of roles and responsibilities in ordering and referral practices in genetic counseling and genetic testing for better healthcare management (organizational level).