A theory-informed systematic review of clinicians' genetic testing practices

被引:21
|
作者
Paul, Jean L. [1 ,2 ]
Leslie, Hanna [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Trainer, Alison H. [4 ,5 ,6 ]
Gaff, Clara [1 ,4 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Murdoch Childrens Res Inst, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[2] Univ Melbourne, Dept Pediat, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[3] SA Clin Genet Serv, Paediat & Reprod Unit, Adelaide, SA, Australia
[4] Univ Melbourne, Fac Med, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[5] Peter MacCallum Canc Ctr, Parkville Integrated Familial Canc Ctr & Genom Me, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[6] Royal Melbourne Hosp, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[7] Melbourne Genom Hlth Alliance, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
关键词
GENOMIC MEDICINE; CANCER SUSCEPTIBILITY; CYSTIC-FIBROSIS; PHYSICIANS; ATTITUDES; KNOWLEDGE; BREAST; HEALTH; CARE; IMPLEMENTATION;
D O I
10.1038/s41431-018-0190-7
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
This systematic literature review investigates factors impacting on clinicians' decisions to offer genetic tests in their practice, and maps them to a theoretical behaviour change framework. Better understanding of these factors will inform the design of effective interventions to integrate genomics tests into clinical care. We conducted a narrative synthesis of empirical research of medical specialists' perspectives on and experiences of offering genetic tests to their patients. This review was based upon the PRISMA statement and guidelines for reviewing qualitative research. Four electronic data sources were searched-MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed. Studies were independently assessed by two authors. Content analysis was applied to map the findings of included studies to a framework validated for behaviour and implementation research, the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). The TDF describes 14 factors known to influence behaviour and has been applied in diverse clinical settings to understand and/or modify health professional behaviour. Thirty-four studies published in 39 articles met inclusion and quality criteria. Most studies were published after 2011 (54%), Northern American (82%), quantitative in design (68%) and addressed familial cancer genetic tests (53%). Of the 14 TDF factors, 13 were identified. The three most common factors were: Environmental Context and Resources (n = 33), Beliefs about Consequences (n = 26), and Knowledge (n = 23). To support the adoption of genomic tests beyond specialist services, nuanced interventions targeting considerations beyond clinician education are needed. For instance, interventions addressing organisational constraints which may restrict clinicians' ability to offer genomic tests are required alongside those targeting factors intrinsic to the clinician.
引用
收藏
页码:1401 / 1416
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A Theory-Informed Systematic Review of Barriers and Enablers to Implementing Multi-Drug Pharmacogenomic Testing
    Youssef, Essra
    Bhattacharya, Debi
    Sharma, Ravi
    Wright, David J.
    JOURNAL OF PERSONALIZED MEDICINE, 2022, 12 (11):
  • [2] A systematic review of theory-informed strategies used in interventions fostering family genetic risk communication
    Zhao, Jingsong
    Guan, Yue
    McBride, Colleen M.
    PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2022, 105 (07) : 1953 - 1962
  • [3] Saving Lives: A Systematic Review on the Efficacy of Theory-Informed Suicide Prevention Programs
    Hill, Karien
    Somerset, Shawn
    Armstrong, Deanne
    Schwarzer, Ralf
    Chan, Carina
    COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH JOURNAL, 2022, 58 (03) : 454 - 473
  • [4] Nurses' Knowledge, Attitudes, Confidence, and Practices with Genetics and Genomics: A Theory-Informed Integrative Review Protocol
    Puddester, Rebecca
    Pike, April
    Maddigan, Joy
    Farrell, Alison
    JOURNAL OF PERSONALIZED MEDICINE, 2022, 12 (09):
  • [5] Sustainability, spread, and scale in trials using audit and feedback: a theory-informed, secondary analysis of a systematic review
    Celia Laur
    Zeenat Ladak
    Alix Hall
    Nathan M. Solbak
    Nicole Nathan
    Shewit Buzuayne
    Janet A. Curran
    Rachel C. Shelton
    Noah Ivers
    Implementation Science, 18
  • [6] Evaluating an interprofessional education curriculum: A theory-informed approach
    Anderson, Elizabeth
    Smith, Roger
    Hammick, Marilyn
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2016, 38 (04) : 385 - 394
  • [7] Sustainability, spread, and scale in trials using audit and feedback: a theory-informed, secondary analysis of a systematic review
    Laur, Celia
    Ladak, Zeenat
    Hall, Alix
    Solbak, Nathan M.
    Nathan, Nicole
    Buzuayne, Shewit
    Curran, Janet A.
    Shelton, Rachel C.
    Ivers, Noah
    IMPLEMENTATION SCIENCE, 2023, 18 (01)
  • [8] Mainstreaming public involvement in a complex research collaboration: A theory-informed evaluation
    Ward, Fiona
    Popay, Jennie
    Porroche-Escudero, Ana
    Akeju, Dorcas
    Ahmed, Saiqa
    Cloke, Jane
    Khan, Koser
    Hassan, Shaima
    Khedmati-Morasae, Esmaeil
    HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2020, 23 (04) : 910 - 918
  • [9] Rethinking the problem of clinically deteriorating patients: Time for theory-informed solutions
    Smith, Dunca
    Aitken, Leanne M.
    AUSTRALIAN CRITICAL CARE, 2023, 36 (06) : 925 - 927
  • [10] A scoping review and theory-informed conceptual model of professional identity formation in medical education
    Sarraf-Yazdi, Shiva
    Pisupati, Anushka
    Goh, Chloe Keyi
    Ong, Yun Ting
    Toh, You Ru
    Goh, Suzanne Pei Lin
    Krishna, Lalit Kumar Radha
    MEDICAL EDUCATION, 2024, 58 (10) : 1151 - 1165