A novel approach in pediatric telegenetic services: geneticist, pediatrician and genetic counselor team

Shobana Kubendran, Siddharthan Sivamurthy, Gerald Bradley Schaefer, Shobana Kubendran, Siddharthan Sivamurthy, Gerald Bradley Schaefer

Abstract

PurposeOur aim was to improve access to genetic services in an underserved region by developing a collaborative telegenetic service delivery model with a pediatrician, medical geneticist, and genetics counselor (GC).MethodsProtocols for the evaluation of common genetic indications were developed. Patients referred with indications suggestive of a syndromic etiology were scheduled to see the geneticist directly via telegenetics. Other patients were scheduled to see the pediatrician and GC in person before follow-up with the geneticist if indicated. Patients seen by the geneticist and/or pediatrician/GC were enumerated and the next available appointment was tracked. Patient satisfaction surveys were conducted.ResultsOf the 265 patients evaluated during the study period, 116 (44%) were evaluated by a pediatrician and GC in person first, after which 82 (71% of those evaluated) required further follow-up with the geneticist. The next available appointment with a pediatrician and GC never exceeded 6 weeks, while new appointments with a geneticist ranged from 3 to 9 months. All patients reported high satisfaction with this genetic service model.ConclusionThe pediatrician/GC clinic provides a model of collaborative care that is a medical home neighbor and exemplifies the integration of genetics into primary care. The telegenetics clinic offers a viable solution to providing competent and convenient access to a geneticist for patients in chronically underserved regions.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Overlapping and complimentary roles of the pediatrician, genetic counselor and geneticist in the telegenetics clinic. Adapted with permission from Williamson L and LeBlanc DB, 2008.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Referral and follow up flow chart.

References

    1. Cooksey JA, Forte G, Benkendorf J, Blitzer MG. The state of the medical geneticist workforce: findings of the 2003 survey of American Board of Medical Genetics certified geneticists. Genet Med 2005;7:439–443.
    1. Hilgart JS, Hayward JA, Coles B, Iredale R. Telegenetics: a systematic review of telemedicine in genetics services. Genet Med 2012;14:765–776.
    1. Burke BLJr, Hall RW, and the Section on Telehealth Care. Telemedicine: pediatric applications. Pediatrics 2015;136:e293–e308.
    1. Wenger TL, Gerdes J, Taub K, Swarr DT, Deardorff MA, Abend NS. Telemedicine for genetic and neurologic evaluation in the neonatal intensive care unit. J Perinatol 2014;34:234–240.
    1. Cohen SA, Marvin ML, Riley BD, Vig HS, Rousseau JA, Gustafson SL. Identification of genetic counseling service delivery models in practice: a report from the NSGC Service Delivery Model Task Force. J.GenetCouns 2013;22:411–421.
    1. Mann S, Keehn A, Andersson H. Who is using telegenetics in the United States: a national survey. 142nd APHA Annual Meeting and Exposition, New Orleans, LA, 17 November 2014.
    1. Flannery D. The Telemedicine Experience,2015. . Accessed 1 November 2016.
    1. Lea DH, Johnson JL, Ellingwood S, Allan W, Patel A, Smith R. Telegenetics in Maine: successful clinical and educational service delivery model developed from a 3-year pilot project. Genet Med 2005;7:21–27.
    1. Stalker HJ, Wilson R, McCune H, Gonzalez J, Moffett M, Zori RT. Telegenetic medicine: improved access to services in an underserved area. J Telemed Telecare 2006;12:182–185.
    1. Schaefer GB, Larson IA, Bolick J, Williamson-Dean L. What is the role of clinical genetics in the patient-centered medical home?: a commentary from the Medical Home Workgroup of the Heartland Regional Genetics and Newborn Screening Collaborative. Genet Med 2016;18:440–442.
    1. Mann S, Hasegawa L, Spencer A. Maximizing access to genetic services using state and federal resources. AMCHP 2008 Annual Conference: Washington, DC, March 1st to 5th 2008.
    1. Haga SB, Burke W, Agans R. Primary-care physicians’access to genetic specialists: an impediment to the routine use of genomic medicine? Genet Med 2013;15:513–514.
    1. Kemper AR, Trotter TL, Lloyd-Puryear MA, Kyler P, Feero WG, Howell RR. A blueprint for maternal and child health primary care physician education in medical genetics and genomic medicine: recommendations of the United States secretary for health and human services advisory committee on heritable disorders in newborns and children. Genet Med 2010;12:77–80.
    1. Manning M, Hudgins L, and the Professional Practice and Guidelines Committee. Array-based technology and recommendations for utilization in medical genetics practice for detection of chromosomal abnormalities. Genet Med 2010;12:742–745.
    1. Alford RL, Arnos KS, Fox M et al, American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics guideline for the clinical evaluation and etiologic diagnosis of hearing loss. Genet Med 2014;16:347–355.
    1. Pyeritz RE, and the American College of Medical Geteics and Genomics, Evaluation of the adolescent or adult with some features of Marfan syndrome. Genet Med 2012;14:171–177.
    1. Miller DT, Adam MP, Aradhya S et al, Consensus statement: chromosomal microarray is a first-tier clinical diagnostic test for individuals with developmental disabilities or congenital anomalies. Am J Hum Genet 2010;86:749–764.
    1. Moeschler JB, Shevell M, and the Committee on Genetics. Comprehensive evaluation of the child with intellectual disability or global developmental delays. Pediatrics 2014;134:e903–e918.
    1. Driscoll DJ, Miller JL, Schwartz S, Cassidy SB. Prader-Willi syndrome. GeneReviews. University of Washington: Seattle, WA, 1997–2013.
    1. McCandless SE, and the Committee on Genetics. Clinical report-health supervision for children with Prader-Willi syndrome. Pediatrics 2011;127:195–204.
    1. Dagli A, Mueller J, Williams C. Angelman syndrome. GeneReviews. University of Washington: Seattle, WA, 1997–2013.
    1. Williams CA, Beaudet AL, Clayton-Smith J et al, Angelman syndrome 2005: updated consensus for diagnostic criteria. Am J Med Genet A 2006;140:413–418.
    1. Schaefer GB, Mendelsohn NJ, and the Professional Practice and Guidelines Committee. Clinical genetics evaluation in identifying the etiology of autism spectrum disorders: 2013 guideline revisions. Genet Med 2013;15:399–407.
    1. Dietz H. Marfan syndrome. GeneReviews. University of Washington: Seattle, WA, 1997–2013.
    1. Tinkle BT, Saal HM, and the Committee on Genetics. Health supervision for children with Marfan syndrome. Pediatrics 2013;132:e1059–e1072.
    1. Friedman J. Neurofibromatosis 1. GeneReviews. University of Washington: Seattle, WA, 1997–2013.
    1. Hersh JH, and the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Genetics. Health supervision for children with neurofibromatosis. Pediatrics 2008;121:633–642.
    1. Williamson L, LeBlanc DB. A genetic services practice model: advanced practice nurse and genetic counselor team. Newborn Infant Nurs Rev 2008;8:30–35.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren