@article{4489196f146f4ef1bd052996e9262fad,
title = "Old challenges or new issues? Genetic health professionals{\textquoteright} experiences obtaining informed consent in diagnostic genomic sequencing",
abstract = "Background: While integrating genomic sequencing into clinical care carries clear medical benefits, it also raises difficult ethical questions. Compared to traditional sequencing technologies, genomic sequencing and analysis is more likely to identify unsolicited findings (UF) and variants that cannot be classified as benign or disease-causing (variants of uncertain significance; VUS). UF and VUS pose new challenges for genetic health professionals (GHPs) who are obtaining informed consent for genomic sequencing from patients. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 31 GHPs across Europe, Australia and Canada to identify some of these challenges. Results: Our results show that GHPs find it difficult to prepare patients to receive results because a vast amount of information is required to fully inform patients about VUS and UF. GHPs also struggle to engage patients–many of whom may be focused on ending their {\textquoteleft}diagnostic odyssey{\textquoteright}–in the informed consent process in a meaningful way. Thus, some questioned how {\textquoteleft}informed{\textquoteright} patients actually are when they agree to undergo clinical genomic sequencing. Conclusions: These findings suggest a tension remains between sufficient information provision at the risk of overwhelming the patient and imparting less information at the risk of uninformed decision-making. We suggest that a shift away from {\textquoteleft}fully informed consent{\textquoteright} toward an approach aimed at realizing, as far as possible, the underlying goals that informed consent is meant to promote.",
keywords = "clinical genetics, Genetic research, human subjects research, informed consent, medicine",
author = "Vears, {Danya F.} and Pascal Borry and Julian Savulescu and Koplin, {Julian J.}",
note = "Funding Information: JS acknowledges the support of Wellcome Trust Grants 203132/Z/16/Z and 104848/Z/14/Z. DV is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow of the Research Foundation?Flanders (FWO Vlaanderen). JS acknowledges the support of Wellcome Trust Grants 203132/Z/16/Z and 104848/Z/14. DV, JS and JK acknowledge the infrastructure funding received from the Victorian State Government through the Operational Infrastructure Support (OIS) Program. We thank Karine S?n?cal for her assistance with some of the data analysis. Funding Information: DV is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow of the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO Vlaanderen). JS acknowledges the support of Wellcome Trust Grants 203132/Z/16/Z and 104848/Z/14. DV, JS and JK acknowledge the infrastructure funding received from the Victorian State Government through the Operational Infrastructure Support (OIS) Program. We thank Karine S{\'e}n{\'e}cal for her assistance with some of the data analysis. Funding Information: Julian Savulescu declares an industry partnership with Illumina on an Australian Research Council funding project on which he is Partner Investigator. Funding for his role is from Australian Research Council and funding from the company is paid to Monash University, which he is not affiliated to. No input or funding of this article. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2020 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.",
year = "2021",
doi = "10.1080/23294515.2020.1823906",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "12--23",
journal = "AJOB Empirical Bioethics",
issn = "2329-4515",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis",
number = "1",
}