Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Feb;21(2):311-318.
doi: 10.1038/s41436-018-0047-z. Epub 2018 Jul 5.

Physicians' perspectives on receiving unsolicited genomic results

Affiliations

Physicians' perspectives on receiving unsolicited genomic results

Douglas B Pet et al. Genet Med. 2019 Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: Physicians increasingly receive genomic test results they did not order, which we term "unsolicited genomic results" (UGRs). We asked physicians how they think such results will affect them and their patients.

Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with adult and pediatric primary care and subspecialty physicians at four sites affiliated with a large-scale return-of-results project led by the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics (eMERGE) Network. Twenty-five physicians addressed UGRs and (1) perceived need for actionability, (2) impact on patients, (3) health care workflow, (4) return of results process, and (5) responsibility for results.

Results: Physicians prioritize actionability of UGRs and the need for clear, evidence-based "paths" for action coupled with clinical decision support (CDS). They identified potential harms to patients including anxiety, false reassurance, and clinical disutility. Clinicians worried about anticipated workflow issues including responding to UGRs and unreimbursed time. They disagreed about who was responsible for responding to UGRs.

Conclusion: The prospect of receiving UGRs for otherwise healthy patients raises important concerns for physicians. Their responses informed development of an in-depth survey for physicians following return of UGRs. Strategic workflow integration of UGRs will likely be necessary to empower physicians to serve their patients effectively.

Keywords: Attitudes; Ethics; Physicians; Return of research results; Unsolicited genomic results.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Green RC, et al. CORRIGENDUM: ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet Med. 2017;19:606. doi: 10.1038/gim.2017.18. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fossey R, et al. Ethical Considerations Related to Return of Results from Genomic Medicine Projects: The eMERGE Network (Phase III) Experience. J Pers Med. 2018;8 doi: 10.3390/jpm8010002. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kolor K, et al. Public awareness and use of direct-to-consumer personal genomic tests from four state population-based surveys, and implications for clinical and public health practice. Genetics in Medicine. 2012;14:860–867. - PMC - PubMed
    1. McGowan ML, Fishman JR, Settersten RA, Jr, Lambrix MA, Juengst ET. Gatekeepers or intermediaries? The role of clinicians in commercial genomic testing. PLoS One. 2014;9:e108484. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108484. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. van der Wouden CH, et al. Consumer Perceptions of Interactions With Primary Care Providers After Direct-to-Consumer Personal Genomic Testing. Annals of internal medicine. 2016;164:513–522. doi: 10.7326/M15-0995. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources