Patients' perspectives regarding health professionals contacting their relatives about genetic risk directly (with patient consent)
- PMID: 39702591
- PMCID: PMC11986157
- DOI: 10.1038/s41431-024-01764-y
Patients' perspectives regarding health professionals contacting their relatives about genetic risk directly (with patient consent)
Abstract
Genetic testing of blood relatives of individuals at high risk of dominant conditions has significant preventive health benefits. However, cascade testing uptake is <50%. Research shows increased testing uptake when health professionals (HPs) contact at-risk relatives directly, with patient consent. Despite international support, this is not standard practice in Australia. We aimed to gather perspectives of genetic testing patients about direct-contact methods. Using an online survey, we surveyed Australian adults with genetic results of relevance for relatives, including patients who (i) self-categorised as being directly contacted by a clinical service, (ii) self-categorised as being referred by a HP, and (iii) received genetic results through a research study. Overall, 442 patients responded (clinical n = 363; research n = 79). Clinical patients self-categorised as 49.0% directly-contacted and 51.0% referred. Overall, the majority of patients had no privacy concerns about direct-contact methods (direct-contact 97%; referred 77%; research 76%). Less than 5% of the combined cohort (n = 19/442) reported significant concerns. The most prevalent concerns were the need for consent to provide HPs with relatives' contact details, and a patient preference to notify relatives before HP contact. Other key findings include preferences about contact methods, including that most patients who received a letter from a genetics service preferred a letter with specific information about the familial genetic condition (n = 141/149; 94.6%) than one with general information about genetic risk. Our findings indicate Australian patients support HPs using direct-contact methods to assist with risk communication to relatives. Findings also identify concerns to be addressed in the design of direct-contact programs.
© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to European Society of Human Genetics.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests. Ethics approval: This project was granted approval by the Royal Children’s Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee on 7 November 2022, HREC reference number 79691, and was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki.
Comment on
-
Health professionals contacting patients' relatives directly about genetic risk (with patient consent): current clinical practice and perspectives.Eur J Hum Genet. 2025 Apr;33(4):476-484. doi: 10.1038/s41431-024-01730-8. Epub 2024 Dec 19. Eur J Hum Genet. 2025. PMID: 39702589
References
-
- George R, Kovak K, Cox SL. Aligning policy to promote cascade genetic screening for prevention and early diagnosis of heritable diseases. J Genet Couns. 2015;24:388–99. - PubMed
-
- Forrest LE, Delatycki MB, Curnow L, Skene L, Aitken M. Genetic health professionals and the communication of genetic information in families: practice during and after a genetic consultation. Am J Med Genet Part A. 2010;152A:1458–66. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous
