Microlearning: Evidence-based education that is effective for busy professionals and short attention spans.

Microlearning uses short educational interventions to provide learners with the necessary knowledge and skills to perform specific tasks or solve immediate problems. This approach is increasingly used across digital platforms to engage learners and foster quick comprehension. Microlearning can be used in clinical genetics education to deliver a comprehensive educational intervention that is segmented into smaller discrete but complimentary components. This report discusses one group's approach to using microlearning in clinician education and provides tips that can be applied to other educational efforts. High-quality genetics education has the potential to be disseminated across multiple delivery methods and to multiple audiences, thereby increasing its impact and reach.

A team-based approach to cardiogenomic education.

While many genetic professionals are involved in the education of lay and professional audiences, most do not have formal training in education theory and program design. Partnerships with adult education experts can provide additional resources and improve the level of instruction, thereby increasing the impact of an educational intervention. This report discusses the experience of a multidisciplinary team of educators, clinicians, and researchers partnering to develop evidence-based education for cardiology practitioners. It includes practical advice for how clinicians and educators can develop more effective education through collaboration, needs assessment, instructional design, and iterative content development.

The Maine Cancer Genomics Initiative: Implementing a Community Cancer Genomics Program Across an Entire Rural State.

PURPOSE: The Maine Cancer Genomics Initiative (MCGI) aimed to overcome patient- and provider-level barriers to using genomic tumor testing (GTT) in rural practices by providing genomic tumor boards (GTBs), clinician education, and access to comprehensive large-panel next-generation sequencing to all patients with cancer in Maine. This paper describes the successful implementation of the initiative and three key services made operative between 2016 and 2020. METHODS: A community-inclusive, hub-and-spoke approach was taken to implement the three program components: (1) a centralized GTB program; (2) a modular online education program, designed using an iterative approach with broad clinical stakeholders; and (3) GTT free of charge to clinicians and patients. Implementation timelines, participation metrics, and survey data were used to describe the rollout. RESULTS: The MCGI was launched over an 18-month period at all 19 oncology practices in the State. Seventy-nine physicians (66 medical oncologists, 5 gynecologic oncologists, 1 neuro-oncologist, and 7 pediatric oncologists) enrolled on the study, representing 100% of all practicing oncologists in Maine. Between July 2017 and September 2020, 1610 patients were enrolled. A total of 515 cases were discussed by 47 (73%) clinicians in 196 GTBs. Clinicians who participated in the GTBs enrolled significantly more patients on the study, stayed in Maine, and reported less time spent in clinical patient care. CONCLUSION: The MCGI was able to engage geographically and culturally disparate cancer care practices in a precision oncology program using a hub-and-spoke model. By facilitating access to GTT, structured education, and GTBs, we narrowed the gap in the implementation of precision oncology in one of the most rural states in the country.

An update on risk assessment for familial and hereditary colorectal cancer.

Family history risk assessment can identify individuals at increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) who would benefit from earlier or more frequent CRC screening. Clinicians should evaluate the patient's family history as well as personal history to identify red flags and patterns that may suggest predisposition to CRC and then use that information to stratify risk into average, increased, and high risk categories to inform genetic counseling recommendations and personalized management.

Perceived Gaps in Genetics Training Among Audiologists and Speech-Language Pathologists: Lessons From a National Survey.

Purpose The aim of this study was to assess knowledge, self-rated confidence, and perceived relevance of genetics in the clinical practice of audiologists and speech-language pathologists (SLPs) toward a better understanding of the need for genetics education, given that genetics plays a growing role in the diagnosis of hearing impairment and communication disorders. Method A survey consisting of 8 demographic items and 16 content questions was returned by 233 audiologists and 283 SLPs. Knowledge of applied genetics was queried with clinical scenarios in a multiple-choice format. Self-assessment of clinical confidence and perceived relevance of genetics in one's field was queried with questions and statements rated on 5-point Likert scales. The benefit of additional training in genetics was rated with a yes/no question, and if answered with yes, suggested topics were entered. Results A large significant gap between confidence in one's own genetics skills and the perceived relevance of genetics was evident, regardless of professional group. Over one third of the audiologists and over two thirds of the SLPs indicated low or somewhat low confidence in their own ability to implement principles of genetics, whereas over two thirds of both groups agreed that genetics is relevant for their field. Regardless of group, confidence scores were significantly and positively associated with relevance scores. Over 80% of respondents in both groups indicated that they would benefit from additional training in genetics. Most commonly suggested topics included genetic causes, general information about genetics, and making referrals. Conclusion Both audiologists and SLPs felt that genetics is relevant for their fields and that additional training in genetics would be beneficial. Future studies should evaluate the effect of genetics training on patient outcomes and the need for incorporating genetics more extensively into audiology and speech-language pathology training programs.

Somatic Testing: Implications for Targeted Treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of key considerations for somatic testing for the purpose of targeting cancer treatment. DATA SOURCES: Literature; research reports. CONCLUSION: Genomic testing of cancer cells to identify variants that drive the carcinogenic process is becoming common in clinical settings. Providers and patients need to weigh the potential benefits of testing with technologic and logistic issues. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Testing is available for thousands of genomic variants to identify one or more to guide targeted treatment. Oncology nurses need to understand the benefits and limitations of participating in patient-centered implementation of this testing.

Three things every nurse practitioner can do to integrate genetics into practice.

Genetic and genomic information has the potential to improve patient care and outcomes by improving clinicians' ability to identify patients at increased risk of disease and, in some cases, personalize treatment and management. However, many clinicians report that they feel unprepared and lack confidence in talking about genomics with their patients. By focusing on family history information and knowing when and how to refer to genetic experts, clinicians can take meaningful steps to improve integration of genetics into patient care.

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing for breast cancer risk.

Increasingly, individuals are interested in genetic testing to find out if they are at increased risk for breast cancer and other diseases. Through direct-to-consumer genetic testing, people can receive information about many different traits, including some risk information about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome. With more people getting this information outside of the medical setting, clinicians should be aware of the benefits and limitations of such testing.

The Dynamics of a Genetic Counseling Peer Supervision Group.

Supervision is a practice that is utilized by a variety of practitioners to hone their counseling skills. Genetic counselors have embraced the supervision process, and some seek out supervision in a group setting with peers. Researchers have described the structure and content of genetic counseling peer supervision groups, and provided evidence for the benefits of seeking peer supervision. This study aimed to describe the interpersonal aspects of one genetic counseling peer supervision group, including personality traits and group dynamics, and how those factors influenced our experiences within the group. We also describe how the process of evaluating these factors impacted us individually and collectively. There was consensus that the group was a safe and trusting one, which was united by similar goals and mutual respect. Members reported gaining insights about how their own personality functioned within the group milieu, and also how the group setting impacted them. Based on our experiences, we recommend that other peer supervision groups consider similar self-evaluations on a periodic basis, both to enhance group functioning and to allow for increased self-awareness and professional growth.

What works in genomics education: outcomes of an evidenced-based instructional model for community-based physicians.

PURPOSE: Education of practicing health professionals is likely to be one factor that will speed appropriate integration of genomics into routine clinical practice. Yet many health professionals, including physicians, find it difficult to keep up with the rapid pace of clinical genomic advances and are often uncomfortable using genomic information in practice. METHODS: Having identified the genomics educational needs of physicians in a Silicon Valley-area community hospital, we developed, implemented, and evaluated an educational course entitled Medicine's Future: Genomics for Practicing Doctors. The course structure and approach were based on best practices in adult learning, including interactivity, case-based learning, skill-focused objectives, and sequential monthly modules. RESULTS: Approximately 20-30 physicians attended each module. They demonstrated significant gains in genomics knowledge and confidence in practice skills that were sustained throughout and following the course. Six months following the course, the majority of participants reported that they had changed their practice to incorporate skills learned during the course. CONCLUSION: We believe the adult-learning principles underlying the development and delivery of Medicine's Future were responsible for participants' outcomes. These principles form a model for the development and delivery of other genomics educational programs for health professionals.Genet Med 18 7, 737-745.