Display options
Share it on

J Community Genet. 2011 Dec;2(4):191-200. doi: 10.1007/s12687-011-0055-z. Epub 2011 Jul 06.

Tracking clinical genetic services for newborns identified through newborn dried bloodspot screening in the United States-lessons learned.

Journal of community genetics

Judith Livingston, Bradford L Therrell, Marie Y Mann, Carolyn Stady Anderson, Katherine Christensen, Jerome L Gorski, Dorothy K Grange, Dawn Peck, Margy Roberston, Sharmini Rogers, Maura Taylor, Celia I Kaye

Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatrics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, USA, [email protected].

PMID: 22109872 PMCID: PMC3215786 DOI: 10.1007/s12687-011-0055-z

Abstract

To determine how US newborn dried bloodspot screening (NDBS) programs obtain patient-level data on clinical genetic counseling services offered to families of newborns identified through newborn NDBS and the extent to which newborns and their families receive these services. These data should serve to inform programs and lead to improved NDBS follow-up services. Collaborations were established with three state NDBS programs that reported systematically tracking genetic counseling services to newborns and their families identified through NDBS. A study protocol and data abstraction form were developed and IRB approvals obtained. Data from three state NDBS programs on a total of 151 patients indicated that genetic services are documented systematically only by metabolic clinics, most often by genetic counselors. Data from 69 endocrinology patients indicated infrequent referrals for genetic services; as expected higher for congenital adrenal hyperplasia than congenital hypothyroidism. Endocrinology patients were often counseled by physicians. While systematic tracking of genetic counseling services may be desirable for quality assurance of NDBS follow-up services, current systems do not appear conducive to this practice. Clinical records are not typically shared with NDBS programs and tracking of follow-up clinical genetic services has not been generally defined as a NDBS program responsibility. Rather, tracking of clinical services, while recognized as useful data, has been viewed by NDBS programs as a research project. The associated IRB requirements for patient-related research may pose an additional challenge. National guidance for NDBS programs that define quality genetic service indicators and monitoring responsibilities are needed. US experiences in this regard may provide information that can assist developing programs in avoiding tracking issues.

References

  1. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2007 Aug;30(4):490-506 - PubMed
  2. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2007 Aug;30(4):482-9 - PubMed
  3. Semin Perinatol. 2010 Apr;34(2):145-55 - PubMed
  4. Pediatrics. 2000 Aug;106(2 Pt 2):383-427 - PubMed
  5. Genet Med. 2008 Apr;10(4):259-61 - PubMed
  6. Genet Med. 2009 Jun;11(6):418-24 - PubMed
  7. Pediatr Res. 2010 Mar;67(3):237 - PubMed
  8. Pediatrics. 2006 May;117(5 Pt 2):S350-4 - PubMed
  9. Pediatrics. 2002 Mar;109(3):526-35 - PubMed
  10. J Pediatr. 2000 Oct;137(4 Suppl):S1-46 - PubMed
  11. Genet Med. 2009 Mar;11(3):176-82 - PubMed
  12. Mol Genet Metab. 2001 Sep-Oct;74(1-2):64-74 - PubMed
  13. Genet Med. 2009 Sep;11(9):663-8 - PubMed
  14. Pediatrics. 2001 Apr;107(4):699-705 - PubMed
  15. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007 Oct;161(10):994-1000 - PubMed
  16. Genet Med. 2007 Aug;9(8):518-27 - PubMed
  17. Genet Med. 2006 Sep;8(9):563-70 - PubMed
  18. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2007 Aug;30(4):466-81 - PubMed

Publication Types