Author:
Coad Beth,Joekes Katherine,Rudnicka Alicja,Frost Amy,Openshaw Mark Robert,Tatton-Brown Katrina,Snape Katie
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The implementation of the National Genomic Medicine Service in the UK has increased patient access to germline genomic testing. Increased testing leads to more genetic diagnoses but does result in the identification of genomic variants of uncertain significance (VUS). The rigorous process of interpreting these variants requires multi-disciplinary, highly trained healthcare professionals (HCPs). To meet this training need, we designed two Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) for HCPs involved in germline genomic testing pathways: Fundamental Principles (FP) and Inherited Cancer Susceptibility (ICS).
Methods
An evaluation cohort of HCPs involved in genomic testing were recruited, with additional data also available from anonymous self-registered learners to both MOOCs. Pre- and post-course surveys and in-course quizzes were used to assess learner satisfaction, confidence and knowledge gained in variant interpretation. In addition, granular feedback was collected on the complexity of the MOOCs to iteratively improve the resources.
Results
A cohort of 92 genomics HCPs, including clinical scientists, and non-genomics clinicians (clinicians working in specialties outside of genomics) participated in the evaluation cohort. Between baseline and follow-up, total confidence scores improved by 38% (15.2/40.0) (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.4–18.0) for the FP MOOC and 54% (18.9/34.9) (95%CI 15.5–22.5) for the ICS MOOC (p < 0.0001 for both). Of those who completed the knowledge assessment through six summative variant classification quizzes (V1–6), a mean of 79% of respondents classified the variants such that correct clinical management would be undertaken (FP: V1 (73/90) 81% Likely Pathogenic/Pathogenic [LP/P]; V2 (55/78) 70% VUS; V3 (59/75) 79% LP/P; V4 (62/72) 86% LP/LP. ICS: V5 (66/91) 73% VUS; V6 (76/88) 86% LP/P). A non-statistically significant higher attrition rate was seen amongst the non-genomics workforce when compared to genomics specialists for both courses. More participants from the non-genomics workforce rated the material as “Too Complex” (FP n = 2/7 [29%], ICS n = 1/5 [20%]) when compared to the specialist genomics workforce (FP n = 1/43 [2%], ICS n = 0/35 [0%]).
Conclusions
After completing one or both MOOCs, self-reported confidence in genomic variant interpretation significantly increased, and most respondents could correctly classify variants such that appropriate clinical management would be instigated. Genomics HCPs reported higher satisfaction with the level of content than the non-genomics clinicians. The MOOCs provided foundational knowledge and improved learner confidence, but should be adapted for different workforces to maximise the benefit for clinicians working in specialties outside of genetics.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Education,General Medicine
Reference41 articles.
1. England HE. The Topol Review: Preparing the healthcare workforce to deliver the digital future. London: HEE; 2019.
2. Snape K, Wedderburn S, Barwell J. The new genomic medicine service and implications for patients. Clin Med. 2019;19(4):273.
3. Josephs KS, Berner A, George A, Scott RH, Firth HV, Tatton-Brown K, et al. Genomics: the power, potential and pitfalls of the new technologies and how they are transforming healthcare. Clin Med (Lond). 2019;19(4):269–72.
4. NHS. NHS Long Term Plan. 2019. Available from: www.longtermplan.nhs.uk.
5. Richards S, Aziz N, Bale S, Bick D, Das S, Gastier-Foster J, et al. Standards and guidelines for the interpretation of sequence variants: a joint consensus recommendation of the American college of medical genetics and genomics and the association for molecular pathology. Genet Med. 2015;17(5):405–24.
Cited by
5 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