Literature DB >> 8124486

Incorporation of genetics in primary care practice. Will physicians do the counseling and will they be directive?

G Geller1, E S Tambor, G A Chase, K J Hofman, R R Faden, N A Holtzman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine, by response to a scenario, how willing primary care physicians would be to counsel a couple about prenatal diagnosis of cystic fibrosis and how directive they would be about whether the couple should undergo prenatal diagnosis and whether the couple should terminate the pregnancy if the fetus is affected.
DESIGN: Survey of a random sample of primary care physicians, psychiatrists, and genetics professionals in 10 geographically representative states. RESPONDENTS: Sixty-five percent (N = 1140) of 1759 obstetricians, pediatricians, internists, family practitioners, and psychiatrists, and 79% (N = 280) of medical geneticists and genetic counselors. OUTCOMES AND
RESULTS: Respondents were evenly divided on whether they would counsel about prenatal diagnosis or refer to a genetic counselor (49.4% and 50.6%, respectively). Those who indicated that they would counsel were likely to have greater knowledge about genetics, greater confidence in communicating about genetics, and higher tolerance for ambiguity and were more likely to have completed their medical training since 1971 and to practice in a rural area. Forty-four percent of physicians would give an opinion about prenatal diagnosis. Men would be more likely to give an opinion than women (P < .005). Only 9.6% of respondents would give an opinion regarding abortion. These respondents were more likely to come from specialties with less exposure to genetics and to value attendance at religious services. Primary care physicians were more likely to give their opinions about prenatal diagnosis and abortion than genetics professionals.
CONCLUSIONS: To the extent that attitudes are reflected in practice, genetic counseling may be more directive when provided by primary care physicians than by genetics professionals, unless primary care physicians' growing involvement in genetics changes their attitudes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Empirical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8124486     DOI: 10.1001/archfami.2.11.1119

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Fam Med        ISSN: 1063-3987


  10 in total

Review 1.  The new genetics. Implications for clinical services in Britain and the United States.

Authors:  A L Kinmonth; J Reinhard; M Bobrow; S Pauker
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-03-07

2.  Directive counsel and morally controversial medical decision-making: findings from two national surveys of primary care physicians.

Authors:  Michael S Putman; John D Yoon; Kenneth A Rasinski; Farr A Curlin
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2013-10-11       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Commercialization of BRCA1/2 testing: practitioner awareness and use of a new genetic test.

Authors:  M K Cho; P Sankar; P R Wolpe; L Godmilow
Journal:  Am J Med Genet       Date:  1999-03-19

4.  Use of an educational computer program before genetic counseling for breast cancer susceptibility: effects on duration and content of counseling sessions.

Authors:  Michael J Green; Susan K Peterson; Maria Wagner Baker; Lois C Friedman; Gregory R Harper; Wendy S Rubinstein; June A Peters; David T Mauger
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 8.822

5.  How do obstetric providers discuss referrals for prenatal genetic counseling?

Authors:  Barbara A Bernhardt; Carrie Mastromarino Haunstetter; Debra Roter; Gail Geller
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Genetic susceptibility to cancer. Family physicians' experience.

Authors:  June C Carroll; Judith Belle Brown; Sean Blaine; Gord Glendon; Patricia Pugh; Wendy Medved
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 3.275

7.  Effect of a computer-based decision aid on knowledge, perceptions, and intentions about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Michael J Green; Susan K Peterson; Maria Wagner Baker; Gregory R Harper; Lois C Friedman; Wendy S Rubinstein; David T Mauger
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-07-28       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Teaching about cystic fibrosis carrier screening by using written and video information.

Authors:  E W Clayton; V L Hannig; J P Pfotenhauer; R A Parker; P W Campbell; J A Phillips
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 11.025

9.  A sociobehavioural perspective on genetic testing and counselling for heritable breast, ovarian and colon cancer.

Authors:  K G Macdonald; B Doan; M Kelner; K M Taylor
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1996-02-15       Impact factor: 8.262

10.  Why is genetic screening for autosomal dominant disorders underused in families? The case of hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia.

Authors:  Barbara A Bernhardt; Cara Zayac; Reed E Pyeritz
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 8.822

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.