TY - JOUR
T1 - A systematic review of interventions to provide genetics education for primary care
T2 - Bmc Family Practice
AU - Paneque, M.
AU - Turchetti, D.
AU - Jackson, S.L.
AU - Lunt, P.
AU - Houwink, E.
AU - Skirton, H.
N1 - ISI Document Delivery No.: DS0JN Times Cited: 1 Cited Reference Count: 40 Paneque, Milena Turchetti, Daniela Jackson, Leigh Lunt, Peter Houwink, Elisa Skirton, Heather Paneque, Milena/0000-0002-6535-4315; Turchetti, Daniela/0000-0002-6792-3921 Erasmus + programme The funding for this study was provided as part of the Gen-Equip project by the Erasmus + programme. The material in this paper reflects only the authors' views and the European Commission and Ecorys UK are not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. 1 2 BIOMED CENTRAL LTD LONDON BMC FAM PRACT
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Background: At least 10 % of patients seen in primary care are said to have a condition in which genetics has an influence. However, patients at risk of genetic disease may not be recognised, while those who seek advice may not be referred or managed appropriately. Primary care practitioners lack knowledge of genetics and genetic testing relevant for daily practice and feel inadequate to deliver genetic services. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate genetics educational interventions in the context of primary care. Methods: Following the process for systematic reviews developed by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, we conducted a search of five relevant electronic databases. Primary research papers were eligible for inclusion if they included data on outcomes of interventions regarding genetics education for primary care practitioners. The results from each paper were coded and grouped under themes. Results: Eleven studies were included in the review. The five major themes identified inductively (post hoc) were: prior experience, changes in confidence, changes in knowledge, changes in practice, satisfaction and feedback. In five of the studies, knowledge of practitioners was improved following the educational programmes, but this tended to be in specific topic areas, while practitioner confidence improved in six studies. However, there was little apparent change to practice. Conclusions: There are insufficient studies of relevant quality to inform educational interventions in genetics for primary care practitioners. Educational initiatives should be assessed using changes in practice, as well as in confidence and knowledge, to determine if they are effective in causing significant changes in practice in genetic risk assessment and appropriate management of patients.
AB - Background: At least 10 % of patients seen in primary care are said to have a condition in which genetics has an influence. However, patients at risk of genetic disease may not be recognised, while those who seek advice may not be referred or managed appropriately. Primary care practitioners lack knowledge of genetics and genetic testing relevant for daily practice and feel inadequate to deliver genetic services. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate genetics educational interventions in the context of primary care. Methods: Following the process for systematic reviews developed by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, we conducted a search of five relevant electronic databases. Primary research papers were eligible for inclusion if they included data on outcomes of interventions regarding genetics education for primary care practitioners. The results from each paper were coded and grouped under themes. Results: Eleven studies were included in the review. The five major themes identified inductively (post hoc) were: prior experience, changes in confidence, changes in knowledge, changes in practice, satisfaction and feedback. In five of the studies, knowledge of practitioners was improved following the educational programmes, but this tended to be in specific topic areas, while practitioner confidence improved in six studies. However, there was little apparent change to practice. Conclusions: There are insufficient studies of relevant quality to inform educational interventions in genetics for primary care practitioners. Educational initiatives should be assessed using changes in practice, as well as in confidence and knowledge, to determine if they are effective in causing significant changes in practice in genetic risk assessment and appropriate management of patients.
U2 - 10.1186/s12875-016-0483-2
DO - 10.1186/s12875-016-0483-2
M3 - Article
C2 - 27445117
VL - 17
JO - BMC Family Practice
JF - BMC Family Practice
SN - 1471-2296
M1 - 89
ER -