4.6 Article

Exploring the feasibility of delivering standardized genomic care using ophthalmology as an example

Journal

GENETICS IN MEDICINE
Volume 19, Issue 9, Pages 1032-1039

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1038/gim.2017.9

Keywords

clinical genetics service; care model; feasibility; genomic; outcomes

Funding

  1. Fight for Sight [1801]
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Research Methods Fellowship
  3. National Institute for Health Research [NIHR-RMFI-2014-05-024] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Broadening access to genomic testing and counseling will be necessary to realize the benefits of personalized health care. This study aimed to assess the feasibility of delivering a standardized genomic care model for inherited retinal dystrophy (IRD) and of using selected measures to quantify its impact on patients. Methods: A pre-/post-prospective cohort study recruited 98 patients affected by IRD to receive standardized multidisciplinary care. A checklist was used to assess the fidelity of the care process. Three patient-reported outcome measures-the Genetic Counselling Outcome Scale (GCOS-24), the ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A), and the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D)-and a resource-use questionnaire were administered to investigate rates of missingness, ceiling effects, and changes over time. Results: The care model was delivered consistently. Higher rates of missingness were found for the genetic-specific measure (GCOS-24). Considerable ceiling effects were observed for the generic measure (EQ-5D). The ICECAP-A yielded less missing data without significant ceiling effects. It was feasible to use telephone interviews for follow-up data collection. Conclusion: The study highlighted challenges and solutions associated with efforts to standardize genomic care for IRD. The study identified appropriate methods for a future definitive study to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the care model.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available