"Is it going to hurt?": the impact of the diagnostic odyssey on children and their families.

The pediatric diagnostic odyssey is a period of uncertainty and emotional turmoil for families, often characterized by multiple minor medical procedures (such as venipuncture) that children may find distressing. Interventions to reduce distress are rarely offered, despite evidence that this is crucial both for avoiding anticipatory anxiety before future procedures and for improving healthcare compliance in adulthood. We interviewed ten mothers of children with neuromuscular disorders, asking about their perceptions of their child's experiences with different medical procedures, the emotional impact of the diagnostic odyssey, implications of obtaining a diagnosis, and interactions with healthcare providers. We coded interviews in ATLAS.ti (version 7.0) based on a priori and emergent themes, and analyzed them based on the principles of interpretive description. We found that predicting and assessing children's reactions to procedures is challenging; parents reported non-invasive procedures such as x-rays were distressing for some children, and that providers did not detect subtle indicators of distress. Parents valued obtaining a diagnosis because it validated their concerns, enabled planning for the child's future healthcare needs, and allowed access to established support networks. This study suggests that healthcare providers can improve the experience of the diagnostic odyssey by validating family concerns and connecting them to support services that are available without a diagnosis.

NIPT: current utilization and implications for the future of prenatal genetic counseling.

BACKGROUND: Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for select fetal trisomies became clinically available in 2011. When it was introduced, there were no recommendations from the major governing bodies in prenatal genetics regarding its incorporation. PURPOSE: We sought to determine how genetic counselors have incorporated NIPT into clinical practice and how NIPT has changed the informed consent process. METHODS: We distributed an anonymous, online survey to National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) members in October 2012. RESULTS: There were 181 respondents who indicated they incorporated NIPT into their practice with the majority (94.1%) offering it to patients with high risk pregnancies. Of the respondents, 45.1% indicated that there should be a separate informed consent form for NIPT. Respondents indicated that a discussion about NIPT with a patient should highlight that it is a screening test, the detection rate is superior to that of maternal serum screening, it screens for specific conditions, and a positive NIPT result should be confirmed with a diagnostic test. CONCLUSION: Following data collection, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American College of Medical Genetics, and NSGC released practice guidelines surrounding NIPT. Our results demonstrate that most genetic counselors have been offering NIPT consistent with these guidelines.

Genetic counselors' views and experiences with the clinical integration of genome sequencing.

In recent years, new sequencing technologies known as next generation sequencing (NGS) have provided scientists the ability to rapidly sequence all known coding as well as non-coding sequences in the human genome. As the two emerging approaches, whole exome (WES) and whole genome (WGS) sequencing, have started to be integrated in the clinical arena, we sought to survey health care professionals who are likely to be involved in the implementation process now and/or in the future (e.g., genetic counselors, geneticists and nurse practitioners). Two hundred twenty-one genetic counselors- one third of whom currently offer WES/WGS-participated in an anonymous online survey. The aims of the survey were first, to identify barriers to the implementation of WES/WGS, as perceived by survey participants; second, to provide the first systematic report of current practices regarding the integration of WES/WGS in clinic and/or research across the US and Canada and to illuminate the roles and challenges of genetic counselors participating in this process; and third to evaluate the impact of WES/WGS on patient care. Our results showed that genetic counseling practices with respect to WES/WGS are consistent with the criteria set forth in the ACMG 2012 policy statement, which highlights indications for testing, reporting, and pre/post test considerations. Our respondents described challenges related to offering WES/WGS, which included billing issues, the duration and content of the consent process, result interpretation and disclosure of incidental findings and variants of unknown significance. In addition, respondents indicated that specialty area (i.e., prenatal and cancer), lack of clinical utility of WES/WGS and concerns about interpretation of test results were factors that prevented them from offering this technology to patients. Finally, study participants identified the aspects of their professional training which have been most beneficial in aiding with the integration of WES/WGS into the clinical setting (molecular/clinical genetics, counseling and bioethics) and suggested that counseling aids (to assist them when explaining aspects of these tests to patients) and webinars focused on WES/WGS (for genetic counselors and other health care professionals) would be useful educational tools. Future research should permit us to further enhance our knowledge of pitfalls and benefits associated with the introduction of these powerful technologies in patient care and to further explore the roles and opportunities for genetic counselors in this rapidly evolving field.

DNA-sequence patenting: National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) position paper.

In November 2000, the Genetic Services Committee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) convened a working group to draft a position paper on patenting DNA-sequences. The mandate of the group was to produce general position statements that support the perspective and needs of consumers of DNA-based genetic tests and therapies (our patients and their families) and participants in DNA-based genetic research. After review and discussion of the literature on DNA-sequence patenting issues, the working group drafted position statement points that support current United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) guidelines; broad licensing of DNA-sequence patents; nonenforcement of DNA-sequence patents in noncommercial research; reasonable royalty rates; an informed consent process for research participants that discloses whether they can share in any financial rewards relating to the project; the development of guidelines for licensing of DNA-sequence patents; and the establishment of oversight organizations to monitor licensing of DNA-sequence patents. These position statements were approved by the NSGC Board of Directors in the fall of 2001.