Assessing the knowledge, perceptions, and practices of primary care clinicians toward pharmacogenetics. Issue 1 (22nd October 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Johengen, Emily K.; Ward, Kristen M.; Coe, Antoinette B.; Pasternak, Amy L.
• Is Part Of: Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy. Volume 4:Issue 1(2021)
• Page Start: 27
• Page End: 32
• Publication Date: 2020-10-22
• Subjects: pharmacists -- pharmacogenetics -- precision medicine -- primary health care; Pharmacy -- Periodicals; Pharmacy Service, Hospital; Periodicals; Electronic journals; Periodical; 615.105
• DOI: 10.1002/jac5.1341
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2574-9870

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Pharmacogenetics (PGx) testing is becoming increasingly available to patients and clinicians, but investigations of PGx testing in primary care and the pharmacist's role in educating clinicians have been limited. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to: (a) determine the utilization of PGx testing in primary care clinics, (b) identify how clinicians document and act on PGx test results, and (c) determine clinician interest in PGx education or consultation from pharmacists. Methods: A 16‐item survey was distributed via email. Eligible participants included physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and pharmacists who work in family medicine, general medicine, geriatric, or pediatric primary care clinics at one academic medical center. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the frequency of PGx tests ordered in primary care clinics, provider comfort with PGx test interpretation, documentation practices, and interest in PGx education or consultation from pharmacists. Results: The overall survey response rate was 15.8% ( n = 55). Most respondents were physicians (84%). Nearly 40% of respondents reported having a patient bring PGx test results to a visit, while only 9% reported ordering a PGx test. Documentation practices were variable, and response to PGx results was most commonly no change in therapy (52%). Only two (3.6%) respondents agreed with the statement, "I feel confident in my ability to interpret PGx test results, " and the majority reported interest in PGx education. Eighty percent of respondents reported they would be likely or very likely to consult a PGx‐trained pharmacist for help interpreting PGx results. Discussion: Clinicians in this survey were more likely to have patients bring in results than to order PGx tests, did not feel confident in result interpretation, and expressed interest in working with pharmacists for PGx test interpretation. This research can help guide the development of PGx‐focused pharmacy services and education for clinicians who are encountering PGx testing in their practice.