Literature DB >> 28115461

Assessing family history of chronic disease in primary care: Prevalence, documentation, and appropriate screening.

June C Carroll1, Denise Campbell-Scherer2, Joanne A Permaul3, Jesse Myers4, Donna P Manca5, Christopher Meaney6, Rahim Moineddin6, Eva Grunfeld7.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the proportion of primary care patients who report a family history (FH) of type 2 diabetes, coronary artery disease, breast cancer, or colorectal cancer (CRC); assess concordance of FH information derived from the electronic medical record (EMR) compared with patient-completed health questionnaires; and assess whether appropriate screening was informed by risk based solely on FH.
DESIGN: Data from the BETTER (Building on Existing Tools to Improve Chronic Disease Prevention and Screening in Primary Care) trial were used. Patients were mailed questionnaires. Baseline FH and screening data were obtained for enrolled patients from the EMR and health questionnaires.
SETTING: Ontario and Alberta. PARTICIPANTS: Randomly selected patients from 8 family practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Agreement on FH between the EMR and questionnaire was determined; logistic regression was used to assess significant predictors of screening.
RESULTS: In total, 775 of 789 (98%) patients completed the health questionnaire. The mean age of participants was 52.5 years and 72% were female. A minimum of 12% of patients (range 12% to 36%) had a reported FH of 1 of 4 chronic diseases. Among patients with positive FH, the following proportions of patients had that FH recorded in the EMR compared with the questionnaire: diabetes, 24% in the EMR versus 36% on the questionnaire, κ = 0.466; coronary artery disease, 35% in the EMR versus 22% on the questionnaire, κ = 0.225; breast cancer, 21% in the EMR versus 22% on the questionnaire, κ = 0.241; and CRC, 12% in the EMR versus 14% on the questionnaire, κ = 0.510. There was moderate agreement for diabetes and CRC. The presence of FH was a significant predictor of CRC screening (odds ratio 1.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.1).
CONCLUSION: A moderate prevalence of FH was found for 4 conditions for which screening recommendations vary with risk based on FH. Having patients self-complete an FH was thought to be feasible; however, questions about FH accuracy and completeness from both self-report and EMR remain. Work is needed to determine how to facilitate the adoption of FH tools into practice as well as strategies linking familial risk to appropriate screening.Trial registration number ISRCTN07170460 (ISRCTN Registry). Copyright© the College of Family Physicians of Canada.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28115461      PMCID: PMC5257240     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Fam Physician        ISSN: 0008-350X            Impact factor:   3.275


  53 in total

1.  Family history: still relevant in the genomics era.

Authors:  Megan Doerr; Kathryn Teng
Journal:  Cleve Clin J Med       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.321

2.  Family health history: the case for better tools.

Authors:  Brandon M Welch; Willard Dere; Joshua D Schiffman
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-05-05       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Family history of diabetes, awareness of risk factors, and health behaviors among African Americans.

Authors:  Kesha Baptiste-Roberts; Tiffany L Gary; Gloria L A Beckles; Edward W Gregg; Michelle Owens; Deborah Porterfield; Michael M Engelgau
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2007-03-29       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Validation of My Family Health Portrait for six common heritable conditions.

Authors:  Flavia M Facio; W Gregory Feero; Amy Linn; Neal Oden; Kandamurugu Manickam; Leslie G Biesecker
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 8.822

5.  Family history-taking in community family practice: implications for genetic screening.

Authors:  L S Acheson; G L Wiesner; S J Zyzanski; M A Goodwin; K C Stange
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2000 May-Jun       Impact factor: 8.822

Review 6.  The family history: the first genetic test, and still useful after all those years?

Authors:  Reed E Pyeritz
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2011-10-07       Impact factor: 8.822

7.  Improving chronic disease prevention and screening in primary care: results of the BETTER pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Eva Grunfeld; Donna Manca; Rahim Moineddin; Kevin E Thorpe; Jeffrey S Hoch; Denise Campbell-Scherer; Christopher Meaney; Jess Rogers; Jaclyn Beca; Paul Krueger; Muhammad Mamdani
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 2.497

8.  Population prevalence of familial cancer and common hereditary cancer syndromes. The 2005 California Health Interview Survey.

Authors:  Maren T Scheuner; Timothy S McNeel; Andrew N Freedman
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  Developing Family Healthware, a family history screening tool to prevent common chronic diseases.

Authors:  Paula W Yoon; Maren T Scheuner; Cynthia Jorgensen; Muin J Khoury
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 2.830

Review 10.  The impact of communicating genetic risks of disease on risk-reducing health behaviour: systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Gareth J Hollands; David P French; Simon J Griffin; A Toby Prevost; Stephen Sutton; Sarah King; Theresa M Marteau
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-03-15
View more
  13 in total

1.  Constructing data-derived family histories using electronic health records from a single healthcare delivery system.

Authors:  Maya Leventer-Roberts; Ilan Gofer; Yuval Barak Corren; Ben Y Reis; Ran Balicer
Journal:  Eur J Public Health       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 3.367

2.  Correction.

Authors: 
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 3.275

Review 3.  Family health history: underused for actionable risk assessment.

Authors:  Geoffrey S Ginsburg; R Ryanne Wu; Lori A Orlando
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Family history recording in UK general practice: the lIFeLONG study.

Authors:  Molly Dineen; Kate Sidaway-Lee; Denis Pereira Gray; Philip H Evans
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 2.290

Review 5.  Heritability for stroke: Essential for taking family history.

Authors:  Masoumeh Pourasgari; Ashraf Mohamadkhani
Journal:  Caspian J Intern Med       Date:  2020-05

6.  Utilizing electronic health record data to understand comorbidity burden among people living with HIV: a machine learning approach.

Authors:  Xueying Yang; Jiajia Zhang; Shujie Chen; Sharon Weissman; Bankole Olatosi; Xiaoming Li
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 4.632

7.  Genetics in primary care: validating a tool to pre-symptomatically assess common disease risk using an Australian questionnaire on family history.

Authors:  Elisa J F Houwink; Olga R Hortensius; Kees van Boven; Annet Sollie; Mattijs E Numans
Journal:  Clin Transl Med       Date:  2019-05-02

Review 8.  A Systematic Review of Etiological Risk Factors Associated With Early Mortality Among National Football League Players.

Authors:  Arthur H Owora; Brittany L Kmush; Bhavneet Walia; Shane Sanders
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2018-12-19

9.  Concordance of chronic conditions among the household members in Shanghai: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Yingyi Qin; Yibin Guo; Yuanjun Tang; Cheng Wu; Xinji Zhang; Qian He; Jia He
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-12-22       Impact factor: 2.692

10.  Implementation, adoption, and utility of family health history risk assessment in diverse care settings: evaluating implementation processes and impact with an implementation framework.

Authors:  R Ryanne Wu; Rachel A Myers; Nina Sperber; Corrine I Voils; Joan Neuner; Catherine A McCarty; Irina V Haller; Melissa Harry; Kimberly G Fulda; Deanna Cross; David Dimmock; Teji Rakhra-Burris; Adam H Buchanan; Geoffrey S Ginsburg; Lori A Orlando
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 8.822

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.