Affiliation:
1. Department of Genetics Stanford University School of Medicine Stanford California USA
2. Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics Stanford University School of Medicine Stanford California USA
3. Health Ethics and Policy Lab Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH‐Zurich) Zurich Switzerland
4. Division Human Genetics University of Cape Town Cape Town South Africa
5. Principal Staff Scientist Genomic Counselling, Engagement and Society, Wellcome Connecting Science Wellcome Genome Campus Hinxton UK
6. Independent Scholar
Abstract
AbstractWe conducted an exploratory survey of genetic counselors internationally to assess similarities and differences in reported practice activities. Between November 2018 and January 2020 we conducted a mass emailing to an estimated 5600 genetic counselors in different countries and regions. We obtained 189 useable responses representing 22 countries, which are included in an aggregate manner. Data from countries with 10 or more responses, comprising 82% of the total (N = 156), are the primary focus of this report: Australia (13), Canada (26), USA (59), UK (17), France (12), Japan (19) and India (10). Twenty activities were identified as common (≥74%) across these countries, encompassing most subcategories of genetic counseling activity. Activities with most frequent endorsement include: reviewing referrals and medical records and identifying genetic testing options as part of case preparation; taking family and medical histories; performing and sharing risk assessment; and educating clients about basic genetic information, test options, outcomes and implications, including management recommendations on the basis of the test results. Genetic counselors also consistently establish rapport, tailor the educational process, facilitate informed decision making and recognize factors that may impact the counseling interaction. The least endorsed activities were in the Medical History category. Notable differences between countries were observed in the endorsement of 33 activities, primarily in the Contracting and Establishing Rapport, Family History, Medical History, Assessing Patients Psychosocially and Providing Psychosocial Support categories. Generalizations about international practice patterns are limited by the low response rate. However, this study is, to our knowledge, the first to systematically compare the clinical practice and specific activities of genetic counselors working in different countries.
Reference29 articles.
1. The Global State of the Genetic Counseling Profession
2. Institutional and Social Issues Surrounding Genetic Counselors in Japan: Current Challenges and Implications for the Global Community
3. CAGC. (2016).Professional Status Survey.https://www.cagc‐accg.ca/doc/CAGC%202016%20PSS%20Summary.pdf
4. Canadian Association of Genetic Counseling. (2013).Practice Based Competencies for Canadian Genetic Counsellors.https://www.cagc‐accg.ca/doc/cagc%20practice%20based%20competencies.pdf
5. Cooper E. &Taylor L.(1994).Comparing Health Care Systems.Context Institute.https://www.context.org/iclib/ic39/cooptalr/
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献