OBJECTIVE: The current study delves into the accessibility of genetic evaluations for individuals with orofacial clefts (OC), comparing data between genetics and treatment centers across Brazil.
METHODS: This cross-sectional retrospective study analyzed primary data from 1463 OC individuals registered in the Brazilian Database of Craniofacial Anomalies (BDCA) between 2008 and 2018 without age or sex selection. Diagnostic exam results stemming from research projects until 2023 were considered.
RESULTS: Of the 1463 individuals with typical OC, 987 were non-syndromic, 462 were syndromic (SOC), 10 presented atypical forms, and three were not specified OC cases. The average age for accessing laboratory diagnosis was 8.5 years among SOC individuals. Notably, more SOC cases were registered in genetics centers than treatment and rehabilitation centers (37.1 % vs. 29 %, p = 0.0015). Those originating from genetics centers accessed diagnosis at an average age of 7.3 years, while those from treatment and rehabilitation centers experienced delays with an average age of 10.7 years (p = 0.0581).
CONCLUSIONS: Irrespective of the center of origin, the data highlight delayed diagnosis and challenges in accessing genetic tests for the syndromic group. Given the widespread reliance on the public health system by most of the Brazilian population, disseminating this data can significantly contribute to shaping an informed perspective on healthcare access. These insights can improve public policies tailored to the unique needs of individuals with OC.

In the Pakistani/British Pakistani community in England it is quite common for people to marry close cousin relatives, which can increase the chances of certain genetic problems in their children. Families in these situations often have little knowledge of genetics and encounter difficulties accessing genetic counselling services and culturally appropriate genetics information is needed to support these families. We describe the co-design of a prototype culturally sensitive smart phone app with the British Pakistani community, to improve understanding of genetics and genetic services.

The utilization of genetics in medical care has enhanced the utility of precision medicine and hence increased the need for clinical genetic services. These services have reduced the costs and expanded the availability of genetic testing, but their use is limited in certain populations. This study explores the access to clinical genetic services for Michigan patients referred to a genetics clinic on the western side of the state. Factors included the travel distance (miles), wait time for appointment (days from the referral date to the date of first appointment), population demographics, and cultural characteristics. A retrospective record review of all aged patients (n = 568) referred to a genetics clinic in 2018 demonstrated that all patients were insured (100%), of which majority were white-non-Hispanic (90.7%), more than half were < 10 years of age at referral (53.3%), and most of them kept their first appointment (93.5%). Our analysis showed that the wait time was associated with referral non-compliance, p < 0.01. Adjusting for all variables, for each additional day in wait time, patients had 1% increased risk of not seeking clinical genetic services (OR = 1.01, 90% CI [1.01, 1.02]). Policies to encourage genetic service utilization and improve equitable access to precision health are needed. An opportunity exists for strategies that broaden and add diverse populations to those receiving genetic services.

The delivery of genetic services in developing countries is faced with significant challenges, despite medical and technological advances globally. The Philippines, being an archipelago, faces even more challenges, with significant disparities in access to healthcare, and tertiary medical centers and specialists being concentrated in the major cities. The utilization of different networks for the integration of genetic services in the existing public health delivery system has been valuable. Using the well-established network of the national newborn screening program, genetic services have been successfully integrated into the delivery of healthcare, even at the grassroot level. Equitable access to healthcare, including genetic services, was highlighted and supported by the enactment of the Rare Disease Law in 2016. The support of the academe to assure the sustainability of services was evident in the establishment of a genetic counseling program to augment the work of a handful of clinical geneticists. Professional societies and support groups have been instrumental in identifying genetic conditions to be prioritized and lobbying for increased public awareness, leading to national programs and policies. This paper primarily discusses the value of networks in the delivery of genetic services, specifically newborn screening, programs for rare diseases, birth defects, and genetic counseling.

Introduction: Before the COVID-19 public health emergency, few genetics providers used telehealth. As a response to this, many genetics providers began conducting telehealth care, referred to as telegenetics, usually with guidance from their institutions but without specific guidance related to the uniqueness of genetic services. Objectives: The Telegenetics Workgroup of the National Coordinating Center for Regional Genetics Networks convened a panel of experts in the fields of telemedicine, genetics, and genomics to review the existing literature on telegenetics and synthesize best operating practices for medical geneticists, genetic counselors, and metabolic dietitians providing telegenetics services. Methods: The group searched PubMed using the terms \"telegenetics,\" \"telemedicine + genetics,\" and \"telehealth + genetics.\" The group also reviewed the Northeast Telehealth Resource Center\'s telegenetics webliography. Websites were searched, including the American Telemedicine Association\'s website, Center for Connected Health Policy, and National Telehealth Resource Center for position statements, standards documents, and guidelines. The group met frequently by videoconference and discussed the literature, and using expert consensus, the group determined best practices in providing telegenetics services. Results: These telegenetics best practices cover important aspects of telegenetics services, including, but not limited to, ongoing delivery of telegenetics services, use of special technology, legal and regulatory requirements, and considerations regarding special settings and circumstances in which telegenetics may be conducted. Conclusions: Recognizing the growing use of telegenetics and a future in which telegenetics continues to be part of the regular practice of genetics, this guide informs genetics providers of best practices for delivering telegenetics services to patients.

UNASSIGNED: In October 2020, rapid prenatal exome sequencing (pES) was introduced into routine National Health Service (NHS) care in England, requiring the coordination of care from specialist genetics, fetal medicine (FM) and laboratory services. This mixed methods study explored the experiences of professionals involved in delivering the pES service during the first 2 years of its delivery in the NHS.
UNASSIGNED: A survey (n = 159) and semi-structured interviews (n = 63) with healthcare professionals, including clinical geneticists, FM specialists, and clinical scientists (interviews only) were used to address: 1) Views on the pES service; 2) Capacity and resources involved in offering pES; 3) Awareness, knowledge, and educational needs; and 4) Ambitions and goals for the future.
UNASSIGNED: Overall, professionals were positive about the pES service with 77% rating it as Good or Excellent. A number of benefits were reported, including the increased opportunity for receiving actionable results for parental decision-making, improving equity of access to genomic tests and fostering close relationships between FM and genetics departments. Nonetheless, there was evidence that the shift to offering pES in a clinical setting had brought some challenges, such as additional clinic time, administrative processes, perceived lack of autonomy in decision-making regarding pES eligibility and difficulty engaging with peripheral maternity units. Concerns were also raised about the lack of confidence and gaps in genomics knowledge amongst non-genetics professionals - especially midwives. However, the findings also highlighted value in both FM, obstetric and genetics professionals benefiting from further training with a focus on recognising and managing prenatally diagnosed genetic conditions.
UNASSIGNED: Healthcare professionals are enthusiastic about the benefits of pES, and through multi-collaborative working, have developed relationships that have contributed to effective communication across specialisms. Although limitations on resources and variation in knowledge about pES have impacted service delivery, professionals were hopeful that improvements to infrastructure and the upskilling of all professionals involved in the pathway would optimise the benefits of pES for both parents and professionals.

BACKGROUND: The increased demand for genetic testing and counseling necessitates healthcare professionals (HCPs) to improve their genetic competency through training programs. This systematic review identified HCPs\' learning needs and their perspectives on essential information for families with hereditary cancer.
METHODS: This review covered studies published from 2013 to 2024 across five databases. Data were analyzed using a content analysis.
RESULTS: Thirteen studies involving 332 HCPs were analyzed. Most studies focused on the learning needs of physicians caring for families affected by Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer in North America and Europe. HCPs required training emphasizing practical counseling skills over the basics of genetics. Learning needs varied by profession: physicians needed training in assessing cancer risk and supporting decision-making in risk management; nurses required information on resources and the genetic care system; genetic counselors sought guidance on family communication and planning. Essential information identified for families included risk-reducing strategies, personalized cancer risk assessment, family implications, psychological issues, (cascade) genetic testing, and social concerns.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings have implications for the development of training programs for HCPs, emphasizing the need for tailored training based on professions. Future research should explore the needs of HCPs caring for families with diverse hereditary cancers and cultural backgrounds.

BACKGROUND: Advancements in genetic disorder management mark a transformative era in healthcare. This study aimed to assess knowledge, attitudes, and barriers to using genetic services among the Egyptian population.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was used to achieve the aim of the study. A convenient sample was used to involve 385 residents of Damanhur City and Beni-Suef City to represent Upper and Lower Egypt. A validated questionnaire covering socio-demographic details, genetic knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers to using genetic services was used.
RESULTS: Regarding genetic knowledge, 70.9% of the participants reported an unsatisfactory level of knowledge about genetics. Furthermore, 67.6% expressed a negative attitude toward genetic services. Concerns about whether the test result is positive were the most common obstacle, cited by 64.94% of participants, followed by cost, which 60.78% of people found to be a major barrier. Significant associations emerge between socio-demographic factors and awareness levels.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings illuminate significant gaps in knowledge and attitude levels where less than a third of the participants had a satisfactory level of knowledge and about one-third had a positive attitude regarding genetic testing. Barriers such as concerns about treatment strategies, financial constraints, and conflict with personal beliefs emerge as critical obstacles. The identified associations between socio-demographic factors and awareness levels underscore the need for targeted interventions tailored to specific demographic groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This study recommends developing and implementing culturally sensitive awareness campaigns about genetics tailored to the specific demographic characteristics of the Egyptian population.

Digital tools are increasingly incorporated into genetics practice to address challenges with the current model of care. Yet, genetics providers\' perspectives on digital tool use are not well characterized.
Genetics providers across Canada were recruited. Semistructured interviews were conducted to ascertain their perspectives on digital tool use and the clinical practice factors that might inform digital tool integration. A qualitative interpretive description approach was used for analysis.
Thirty-three genetics providers across 5 provinces were interviewed. Participants had favorable attitudes toward digital tool use. They were open to using digital tools in the pretest phase of the genetic testing pathway and for some posttest tasks or in a hybrid model of care. Participants expressed that digital tools could enhance efficiency and allow providers to spend more time practicing at the top of scope. Providers also described the need for careful consideration of the potential impact of digitalization on the clinician-patient dynamic, access to and equity of care, and unintended digital burden on providers.
Genetics providers considered digital tools to represent a viable solution for improving access, efficiency, and quality of care in genetics practice. Successful use of digital tools in practice will require careful consideration of their potential unintended impacts.

UNASSIGNED: The integration of genetic services into African healthcare systems is a multifaceted endeavor marked by both obstacles and prospects. This study aims to furnish evidence-based recommendations for policymakers and healthcare entities to facilitate the effective assimilation of genetic services within African healthcare systems.
UNASSIGNED: Employing a scoping review methodology, we scrutinized peer-reviewed studies spanning from 2003 to 2023, sourced from PubMed, Scopus, and Africa-wide databases. Our analysis drew upon eight pertinent research studies conducted between 2016 and 2023, encompassing diverse genetic topics across six African nations, namely Cameroon, Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, and Tanzania.
UNASSIGNED: The reviewed studies underscored numerous challenges hindering the implementation of genetic services in African healthcare systems. These obstacles encompassed deficiencies in disease awareness and education, impediments to genetic testing, resource scarcities, ethical quandaries, and issues related to follow-up and retention. Nevertheless, the authors also identified opportunities and strategies conducive to successful integration, emphasizing proactive measures such as community engagement, advocacy, and the fostering of supportive networks.
UNASSIGNED: The integration of genetic services in Africa holds promise for enhancing healthcare outcomes but also poses challenges and opportunities for healthcare and biotechnology enterprises. To address gaps in disease awareness, we advocate for healthcare providers to invest in educational initiatives, forge partnerships with local institutions, and leverage digital platforms. Furthermore, we urge businesses to innovate and devise cost-effective genetic testing models while establishing online forums to promote dialogue and contribute positively to African healthcare.