BMJ neurology open · 2026
Incorporating genetics and genetic counselling in neurology clinics: a survey of neurologists' perceptions and current practices.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gorman Madeline, Maynard Lauren, Horak Holli, Schaibley Valerie
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Neurogenetics has grown significantly in recent years, yet advances have not always been incorporated into clinical practice. In previous studies, neurologists reported limited confidence in ordering and interpreting genetic tests, implying a gap between genetic advances and their application in neurology. Genetic counsellors are uniquely trained to facilitate genetic testing, interpret results and provide psychosocial support, ultimately improving patient care.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this study, we assessed the utilisation of genetic testing and genetic counselling in neurology practice as well as neurologists' perceived value of genetic counsellors. We emailed a cross-sectional survey to board-certified neurologists practising in Arizona. Out of the 28 completed responses, most respondents had practised for more than 15 years and worked in urban settings, yet 68% did not have a genetic counsellor embedded into their clinic. We found that neurologists with more genetics training were more likely to order genetic testing and felt more comfortable performing genetic counselling roles (p=0.739, p=3.66×10⁻⁵). Additionally, greater years of experience in practice correlated with increased comfort performing genetic counselling roles (p=0.519, p=0.005). However, we found no significant relationship between physicians' level of genetics training or comfort performing genetic counselling roles and their perceived value of having a genetic counsellor in neurology settings, suggesting that many neurologists value genetic counsellors' role in neurology clinics. These results highlight the need for increased integration of genetic counsellors in neurology settings to enhance patient care.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Arizona Institutional Review Board approved this study (STUDY00004930). Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained electronically, and all responses were anonymous.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this study, we assessed the utilisation of genetic testing and genetic counselling in neurology practice as well as neurologists' perceived value of genetic counsellors. We emailed a cross-sectional survey to board-certified neurologists practising in Arizona. Out of the 28 completed responses, most respondents had practised for more than 15 years and worked in urban settings, yet 68% did not have a genetic counsellor embedded into their clinic. We found that neurologists with more genetics training were more likely to order genetic testing and felt more comfortable performing genetic counselling roles (p=0.739, p=3.66×10⁻⁵). Additionally, greater years of experience in practice correlated with increased comfort performing genetic counselling roles (p=0.519, p=0.005). However, we found no significant relationship between physicians' level of genetics training or comfort performing genetic counselling roles and their perceived value of having a genetic counsellor in neurology settings, suggesting that many neurologists value genetic counsellors' role in neurology clinics. These results highlight the need for increased integration of genetic counsellors in neurology settings to enhance patient care.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Arizona Institutional Review Board approved this study (STUDY00004930). Participation was voluntary, informed consent was obtained electronically, and all responses were anonymous.