OBJECTIVES: To explore genetics professionals' and patients' views about which outcome domains are most appropriate to measure the patient benefits of using a clinical genetics service. METHODS: A postal Delphi survey was sent to: 115 consultant geneticists; 162 genetic counsellors; 156 support group representatives; 106 patients. The survey contained 19 outcome domains and respondents assessed the usefulness of each for clinical genetics services. RESULTS: The final professional panel comprised 115 genetics healthcare professionals and the patient panel comprised 72 patients. The outcome domains that achieved consensus (at least 75% of panel rated 'useful') for the patient and professional panels were: decision-making; knowledge of the genetic condition; perceived personal control; risk perception; satisfaction; meeting expectations; ability to cope; diagnosis accuracy; quality of life. Comparison of the ratings between the professional panel and the patient panel showed there was no statistical difference (chi(2), p<0.01) between the ratings ('useful' compared to 'not useful') for 14 of the 19 outcome domains but found differences for the perceived usefulness of: level of depression; health status; spiritual well-being; test accuracy; rate of termination. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi survey identified nine outcome domains which are good starting points to develop a core set of outcome measures for evaluating clinical genetics services.
OBJECTIVES: To explore genetics professionals' and patients' views about which outcome domains are most appropriate to measure the patient benefits of using a clinical genetics service. METHODS: A postal Delphi survey was sent to: 115 consultant geneticists; 162 genetic counsellors; 156 support group representatives; 106 patients. The survey contained 19 outcome domains and respondents assessed the usefulness of each for clinical genetics services. RESULTS: The final professional panel comprised 115 genetics healthcare professionals and the patient panel comprised 72 patients. The outcome domains that achieved consensus (at least 75% of panel rated 'useful') for the patient and professional panels were: decision-making; knowledge of the genetic condition; perceived personal control; risk perception; satisfaction; meeting expectations; ability to cope; diagnosis accuracy; quality of life. Comparison of the ratings between the professional panel and the patient panel showed there was no statistical difference (chi(2), p<0.01) between the ratings ('useful' compared to 'not useful') for 14 of the 19 outcome domains but found differences for the perceived usefulness of: level of depression; health status; spiritual well-being; test accuracy; rate of termination. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi survey identified nine outcome domains which are good starting points to develop a core set of outcome measures for evaluating clinical genetics services.
Authors: Kennedy Borle; Nicola Kopac; Nick Dragojlovic; Elisabet Rodriguez Llorian; Jan M Friedman; Alison M Elliott; Larry D Lynd Journal: Eur J Hum Genet Date: 2022-01-15 Impact factor: 5.351
Authors: Blair H Smith; Nicola Torrance; Janice A Ferguson; Michael I Bennett; Michael G Serpell; Kate M Dunn Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2012-05-28 Impact factor: 2.474
Authors: Patricia M Dekkers-Sánchez; Haije Wind; Judith K Sluiter; Monique H W Frings-Dresen Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2012-05-24 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Mohammad O Tallouzi; Jonathan M Mathers; David J Moore; Philip I Murray; Nicholas Bucknall; Jane M Blazeby; Melanie Calvert; Alastair K Denniston Journal: Trials Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 2.279