OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the types of genetic screening tests that are performed in women of childbearing ages in New Jersey. METHOD: Data from patients who had a reproductive genetics consultation between January 1, 2012, and July 31, 2012, were stratified according to the referring providers, i.e., those from academic or private practices, and descriptive analyses performed. Unconventional genetic screening was defined as any test ordered by the referring health care provider outside the recommendations from the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists or the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. RESULTS: Overall, 30% of 371 patients referred for a genetic consultation underwent unconventional screening. As compared to patients from academic practices, the relative rate of unconventional screening was 10-fold higher among patients from private practices, resulting in a relative 34-fold increase in the estimated cost in genetic screening (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: This set of preliminary observations highlight the need for further state, nationwide, and international studies to understand the financial, personal, and societal impact that this discrepancy health care system in the use of genetic carrier screening portends.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the types of genetic screening tests that are performed in women of childbearing ages in New Jersey. METHOD: Data from patients who had a reproductive genetics consultation between January 1, 2012, and July 31, 2012, were stratified according to the referring providers, i.e., those from academic or private practices, and descriptive analyses performed. Unconventional genetic screening was defined as any test ordered by the referring health care provider outside the recommendations from the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists or the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics. RESULTS: Overall, 30% of 371 patients referred for a genetic consultation underwent unconventional screening. As compared to patients from academic practices, the relative rate of unconventional screening was 10-fold higher among patients from private practices, resulting in a relative 34-fold increase in the estimated cost in genetic screening (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: This set of preliminary observations highlight the need for further state, nationwide, and international studies to understand the financial, personal, and societal impact that this discrepancy health care system in the use of genetic carrier screening portends.