Cargando…

Health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: Integration of genetic testing into routine oncology care could improve access to testing. This systematic review investigated interventions and the tailored implementation strategies aimed at increasing access to genetic counselling and testing and identifying hereditary cancer in oncol...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: O’Shea, Rosie, Taylor, Natalie, Crook, Ashley, Jacobs, Chris, Jung Kang, Yoon, Lewis, Sarah, Rankin, Nicole M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8133413/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34010335
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250379
_version_ 1783695063809785856
author O’Shea, Rosie
Taylor, Natalie
Crook, Ashley
Jacobs, Chris
Jung Kang, Yoon
Lewis, Sarah
Rankin, Nicole M.
author_facet O’Shea, Rosie
Taylor, Natalie
Crook, Ashley
Jacobs, Chris
Jung Kang, Yoon
Lewis, Sarah
Rankin, Nicole M.
author_sort O’Shea, Rosie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Integration of genetic testing into routine oncology care could improve access to testing. This systematic review investigated interventions and the tailored implementation strategies aimed at increasing access to genetic counselling and testing and identifying hereditary cancer in oncology. METHODS: The search strategy results were reported using the PRISMA statement and four electronic databases were searched. Eligible studies included routine genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer or uptake after universal tumour screening for colorectal or endometrial cancer. The titles and abstracts were reviewed and the full text articles screened for eligibility. Data extraction was preformed using a designed template and study appraisal was assessed using an adapted Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Extracted data were mapped to Proctor’s et al outcomes and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and qualitatively synthesised. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies, published up to May 2020, met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five studies ranged from poor (72%), fair to good (28%) quality. Most interventions identified were complex (multiple components) such as; patient or health professional education, interdisciplinary practice and a documentation or system change. Forty-eight percent of studies with complex interventions demonstrated on average a 35% increase in access to genetic counselling and a 15% increase in testing completion. Mapping of study outcomes showed that 70% and 32% of the studies aligned with either the service and client or the implementation level outcome and 96% to the process or inner setting domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. CONCLUSION: Existing evidence suggests that complex interventions have a potentially positive effect towards genetic counselling and testing completion rates in oncology services. Studies of sound methodological quality that explore a greater breadth of pre and post implementation outcomes and informed by theory are needed. Such research could inform future service delivery models for the integration of genetics into oncology services.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8133413
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81334132021-05-27 Health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: A systematic review O’Shea, Rosie Taylor, Natalie Crook, Ashley Jacobs, Chris Jung Kang, Yoon Lewis, Sarah Rankin, Nicole M. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Integration of genetic testing into routine oncology care could improve access to testing. This systematic review investigated interventions and the tailored implementation strategies aimed at increasing access to genetic counselling and testing and identifying hereditary cancer in oncology. METHODS: The search strategy results were reported using the PRISMA statement and four electronic databases were searched. Eligible studies included routine genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer or uptake after universal tumour screening for colorectal or endometrial cancer. The titles and abstracts were reviewed and the full text articles screened for eligibility. Data extraction was preformed using a designed template and study appraisal was assessed using an adapted Newcastle Ottawa Scale. Extracted data were mapped to Proctor’s et al outcomes and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and qualitatively synthesised. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies, published up to May 2020, met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five studies ranged from poor (72%), fair to good (28%) quality. Most interventions identified were complex (multiple components) such as; patient or health professional education, interdisciplinary practice and a documentation or system change. Forty-eight percent of studies with complex interventions demonstrated on average a 35% increase in access to genetic counselling and a 15% increase in testing completion. Mapping of study outcomes showed that 70% and 32% of the studies aligned with either the service and client or the implementation level outcome and 96% to the process or inner setting domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. CONCLUSION: Existing evidence suggests that complex interventions have a potentially positive effect towards genetic counselling and testing completion rates in oncology services. Studies of sound methodological quality that explore a greater breadth of pre and post implementation outcomes and informed by theory are needed. Such research could inform future service delivery models for the integration of genetics into oncology services. Public Library of Science 2021-05-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8133413/ /pubmed/34010335 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250379 Text en © 2021 O’Shea et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
O’Shea, Rosie
Taylor, Natalie
Crook, Ashley
Jacobs, Chris
Jung Kang, Yoon
Lewis, Sarah
Rankin, Nicole M.
Health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: A systematic review
title Health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: A systematic review
title_full Health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: A systematic review
title_fullStr Health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: A systematic review
title_short Health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: A systematic review
title_sort health system interventions to integrate genetic testing in routine oncology services: a systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8133413/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34010335
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250379
work_keys_str_mv AT oshearosie healthsysteminterventionstointegrategenetictestinginroutineoncologyservicesasystematicreview
AT taylornatalie healthsysteminterventionstointegrategenetictestinginroutineoncologyservicesasystematicreview
AT crookashley healthsysteminterventionstointegrategenetictestinginroutineoncologyservicesasystematicreview
AT jacobschris healthsysteminterventionstointegrategenetictestinginroutineoncologyservicesasystematicreview
AT jungkangyoon healthsysteminterventionstointegrategenetictestinginroutineoncologyservicesasystematicreview
AT lewissarah healthsysteminterventionstointegrategenetictestinginroutineoncologyservicesasystematicreview
AT rankinnicolem healthsysteminterventionstointegrategenetictestinginroutineoncologyservicesasystematicreview