Search

BACKGROUND: Prenatal exome sequencing (ES) for the diagnosis of fetal anomalies was implemented nationally in England in October 2020 by the NHS Genomic Medicine Service (GMS). The GMS is based around seven regional Genomic Laboratory Hubs (GLHs). Prenatal ES has the potential to significantly improve NHS prenatal diagnostic services by increasing genetic diagnoses and informing prenatal decision-making. Prenatal ES has not previously been offered routinely in a national healthcare system and there are gaps in knowledge and guidance. METHODS: Our mixed-methods evaluation commenced in October 2020, aligning with the start date of the NHS prenatal ES service. Study design draws on a framework developed in previous studies of major system innovation. There are five interrelated workstreams. Workstream-1 will use interviews and surveys with professionals, non-participant observations and documentary analysis to produce indepth case studies across all GLHs. Data collection at multiple time points will track changes over time. In Workstream-2 qualitative interviews with parents offered prenatal ES will explore experiences and establish information and support needs. Workstream-3 will analyse data from all prenatal ES tests for nine-months to establish service outcomes (e.g. diagnostic yield, referral rates, referral sources). Comparisons between GLHs will identify factors (individual or service-related) associated with any variation in outcomes. Workstream-4 will identify and analyse practical ethical problems. Requirements for an effective ethics framework for an optimal and equitable service will be determined. Workstream-5 will assess costs and cost-effectiveness of prenatal ES versus standard tests and evaluate costs of implementing an optimal prenatal ES care pathway. Integration of findings will determine key features of an optimal care pathway from a service delivery, parent and professional perspective. DISCUSSION: The proposed formative and summative evaluation will inform the evolving prenatal ES service to ensure equity of access, high standards of care and benefits for parents across England.

Background: A new nationally commissioned NHS England Genomic Medicine Service (GMS) was recently established to deliver genomic testing with equity of access for patients affected by rare diseases and cancer. The overarching aim of this research is to evaluate the implementation of the GMS during its early years, identify barriers and enablers to successful implementation, and provide recommendations for practice. The focus will be on the use of genomic testing for paediatric rare diseases.\ud Methods: This will be a four-year mixed-methods research programme using clinic observations, interviews and surveys. Study 1 consists of qualitative interviews with designers/implementers of the GMS in Year 1 of the research programme, along with documentary analysis to understand the intended outcomes for the Service. These will be revisited in Year 4 to compare intended outcomes with what happened in practice, and to identify barriers and facilitators that were encountered along the way. Study 2 consists of clinic observations (pre-test counselling and results disclosure) to examine the interaction between health professionals and parents, along with follow-up interviews with both after each observation. Study 3 consists of a longitudinal survey with parents at two timepoints (time of testing and 12 months post-results) along with follow-up interviews, to examine parent-reported experiences and outcomes. Study 4 consists of qualitative interviews and a cross-sectional survey with medical specialists to identify preparedness, facilitators and challenges to mainstreaming genomic testing. The use of theory-based and pre-specified constructs will help generalise the findings and enable integration across the various sub-studies. \ud Dissemination: We will disseminate our results to policymakers as findings emerge, so any suggested changes to service provision can be considered in a timely manner. A workshop with key stakeholders will be held in Year 4 to develop and agree a set of recommendations for practice.

BACKGROUND: A new nationally commissioned NHS England Genomic Medicine Service (GMS) was recently established to deliver genomic testing with equity of access for patients affected by rare diseases and cancer. The overarching aim of this research is to evaluate the implementation of the GMS during its early years, identify barriers and enablers to successful implementation, and provide recommendations for practice. The focus will be on the use of genomic testing for paediatric rare diseases.METHODS: This will be a four-year mixed-methods research programme using clinic observations, interviews and surveys. Study 1 consists of qualitative interviews with designers/implementers of the GMS in Year 1 of the research programme, along with documentary analysis to understand the intended outcomes for the Service. These will be revisited in Year 4 to compare intended outcomes with what happened in practice, and to identify barriers and facilitators that were encountered along the way. Study 2 consists of clinic observations (pre-test counselling and results disclosure) to examine the interaction between health professionals and parents, along with follow-up interviews with both after each observation. Study 3 consists of a longitudinal survey with parents at two timepoints (time of testing and 12 months post-results) along with follow-up interviews, to examine parent-reported experiences and outcomes. Study 4 consists of qualitative interviews and a cross-sectional survey with medical specialists to identify preparedness, facilitators and challenges to mainstreaming genomic testing. The use of theory-based and prespecified constructs will help generalise the findings and enable integration across the various sub-studies.DISSEMINATION: We will disseminate our results to policymakers as findings emerge, so any suggested changes to service provision can be considered in a timely manner. A workshop with key stakeholders will be held in Year 4 to develop and agree a set of recommendations for practice.

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of an animation against two leaflets with and without images, in educating young people about genome sequencing (GS). Methods: An experimental survey with three assessment points (pre- intervention [T1], post – intervention [T2], 6-week follow-up [T3]). Participants (N = 606) were randomly assigned to receive one of three educational interventions; animation (n = 212); leaflet with images (n = 197); or leaflet with text only (n = 197). Measures of objective and subjective knowledge were completed at T1 (N = 606), T2 (N = 606) and T3 (N = 459). Measures of attitudes, intentions and beliefs towards GS and satisfaction with intervention were completed at T2 only. Results: The type of educational intervention young people received had no significant impact on their objective or subjective knowledge at both T2 and T3 (all p > .05), nor did the educational intervention type affect their attitudes, intentions and beliefs towards GS at T2 (p > .05). However, participant satisfaction was significantly higher in the animation group than the leaflet groups (p < .001). Conclusion: Animations and leaflets are both effective ways to deliver genomic education to young people, but the animations lead to higher satisfaction. Practice implications: Different individuals may find different modes of educational resources more accessible than others. Therefore a range of resources should ideally be made available to patients.

Confidence and knowledge scores. Table 2 Opinions about the face-to-face presentation from participants immediately after the training session. Table 3 Opinions on the written fact-sheet 20. (DOCX 18Â kb)

Study questionnaires . The three questionnaires (Q1, Q2, Q3) used in the study are provided in full. (DOCX 83Â kb)

Objective The goal of this study is to investigate women's preferences and information needs for routine implementation of fetal Rhesus D (RhD) typing using cell-free fetal DNA. Methods A questionnaire was developed following focus groups and interviews with both health professionals and RhD negative (RhD−) women offered fetal RhD genotyping within a research study and distributed to RhD− women attending routine antenatal appointments in four National Health Service hospitals. Current knowledge of blood types, anti-D administration, fetal RhD genotyping and future practices were explored. Results A total of 19 respondents participated in interviews and focus groups, and 270 respondents completed the questionnaires. Questionnaire respondents overwhelmingly felt that the test should be offered to all RhD− women (92.1%), and 75.9% said that they would accept this test. Most were happy to have the test even if it involved extra blood tests (89.3%) or appointments (79%). The knowledge of blood groups was poor. Although 90.7% knew that the baby could have a different blood group from themselves, only 34% knew that blood groups are inherited from both parents. More than 40% were not aware that anti-D would not be required if their baby was RhD−. Conclusions Women would welcome the introduction of routine fetal RhD genotyping. Information leaflets and training of midwives will be essential for implementation to ensure good understanding regarding testing. © 2013 The Authors. Prenatal Diagnosis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.