Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

N A Holtzman

Publications and source records attributed to N A Holtzman.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Carrier screening for cystic fibrosis among Maryland obstetricians before and after the 1997 NIH Consensus Conference.

The 1997 National Institutes of Health (NIH) Consensus Conference on Cystic Fibrosis (CF) testing recommended that carrier screening be offered to all pregnant women and couples planning a pregnancy. We surveyed 492 Maryland Ob-Gyns before and after the consensus conference to: (1) assess whether obstetricians changed their practice regarding CF carrier testing, and (2) identify the factors associated with changing practice patterns, including awareness of the statement, and knowledge about CF. Fifty-six percent (275) responded to the first mail questionnaire and 107 obstetricians responded to both questionnaires. In 1998, only 18% of respondents to the second questionnaire were familiar with the NIH statement, but 43% reported discussing testing with patients with no family history, a significant increase from 1997, when only 20% reported discussing testing. Less than one-third correctly answered six multiple-choice knowledge questions about CF and carrier testing. In multivariate analysis, knowledge and familiarity with the NIH consensus statement were not associated with beginning to discuss CF carrier testing after the CF conference with their patients without a family history.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Putting the search for genes in perspective.

The sequencing of the human genome has been heralded by both the mass media and scientists as a breakthrough that will allow the detection of individuals at increased risk for common diseases and the tailoring of drugs to an individual's genetic profile in order to prevent disease. Sequencing is likely to benefit those at risk of developing rare diseases in which inherited mutations in a single gene play a major causal role. In the vast majority of people with common diseases, however, genotypes at many different loci, as well as environmental exposures, must be simultaneously present before disease appears. Elucidating the genes involved will prove elusive. In addition to the large number, different combinations account for a particular disease. Most of the genotypes that contribute to the constellation of necessary genes are uncommon and will be difficult to find. Common genotypes may confer susceptibility but will be weak predictors of disease. Because of the difficulty of discovering genes for common diseases, designing therapies will also prove difficult. More attention to environmental risk factors for particular diseases will have greater yield than a genetic search, but this too will be difficult because of environmental-genetic and other interactions. The search for risk factors for particular diseases neglects the political and social milieu in which individuals swim or sink and in which all diseases occur.

Environmental Health↗
PubMed2000

Primary care physicians' perceptions of barriers to genetic testing and their willingness to participate in research.

Our objective was to explore the barriers and motivations to: 1) appropriate diffusion of genetic services into primary care practice; and 2) primary care physicians' (PCPs) willingness to participate in clinical studies to assess the safety and effectiveness of emerging genetic technologies. A random sample (n = 994) of PCPs was invited to be interviewed. Of the 80 who agreed, 60 were interviewed, 52 by telephone. A semi-structured guide was used. A questionnaire mailed to 752 of the PCPs was used to elicit information from physicians who did not want to be interviewed. Among interviewees, uncertainty as to the clinical utility and clinical validity of predictive genetic testing were the leading barriers to incorporation of this technology into practice, being mentioned by 60 and 43% of subjects, respectively. Of the 100 (13. 3%) physicians returning the questionnaire who declined to be interviewed, 30% said they would be willing to participate in research on the safety and effectiveness of predictive genetic tests. Of those who were interviewed, 92% were willing to participate in such research. Most physicians do not see genetics as important in their practice today; many anticipate greater importance in the future. The proportion of physicians interested in participating in research to assess the safety and effectiveness of genetic tests is sufficient to make large scale, collaborative, practice-based evaluation feasible. Additionally, participation in research may serve as an effective medium for physician education in genetics.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Genetic testing.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Age of Onset↗
PubMed2000

Factors influencing health insurers' decisions to cover new genetic technologies.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relative importance of factors influencing health insurers' coverage of new genetic technologies. METHODS: A national survey in which the decision makers for private health insurers were asked whether they would cover cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier screening, testing for genetic susceptibility to breast cancer (BRCA test), and medical costs of a clinical trial of gene therapy for CF under a variety of conditions. RESULTS: Respondents' coverage of the two tests and of medical costs of clinical trials was low at the time of the study (4%-15.5% of insurers). Their coverage of CF carrier screening and BRCA testing would be increased significantly if the group tested was restricted to those at high risk, if detection rates were higher and costs lower, and if testing was endorsed by a national professional group or consensus conference. Coverage of the medical costs of a trial of CF gene therapy would be significantly more likely if the trial was restricted to children or adults with severe CF, safety and effectiveness was proven, and therapy could be administered in a regional hospital or an outpatient setting rather than in a research hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Health insurers play a critical role in the diffusion of new genetic technologies. The validity of genetic tests and the safety and effectiveness of new therapies are primary factors influencing health insurers' coverage. Lower costs and approval of professional groups are other factors associated with increased coverage.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Should women at increased risk for breast and ovarian cancer be randomized to prophylactic surgery? An ethical and empirical assessment.

More information is needed about the relative effectiveness of prophylactic surgery, chemoprevention, and surveillance in reducing breast and ovarian cancer risk in women with an inherited susceptibility mutation. We assessed practical and ethical barriers to conducting randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to compare preventive interventions for breast and ovarian cancer. Eighty-seven at-risk women who attended an education and counseling session about BRCA1/2 testing were asked about their willingness to participate in hypothetical research studies for breast and ovarian cancer risk reduction. In addition, 247 Maryland physicians from five specialties completed a mail survey including a question about their likelihood of recommending RCT participation to an at-risk woman. Nineteen percent of at-risk women reported willingness to participate in a hypothetical RCT for breast cancer risk reduction and 17% for ovarian cancer risk reduction. Women with children and women likely to have a prophylactic mastectomy if found to have a susceptibility mutation were significantly more willing to participate in an RCT. A majority of women would be willing to participate in nonrandomized trials or registries. Fifty-two percent of physicians responded that they would be likely to recommend RCT participation to a woman carrying a breast cancer susceptibility mutation. Oncologists were the most likely to recommend an RCT. Although the results of nonrandomized trials may be difficult to interpret because of such issues as selection bias. Greater feasibility combined with fewer ethical concerns make nonrandomized trials a more viable alternative to randomized trials for evaluation of preventive interventions for breast and ovarian cancer when prophylactic surgery is one of the treatments being evaluated.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Promoting safe and effective genetic tests in the United States: work of the task force on genetic testing.

The Task Force on Genetic Testing was created to review genetic testing in the United States and, when necessary, to make recommendations to ensure the development of safe and effective genetic tests. A survey to explore the state of genetic testing was undertaken for the Task Force and completed in early 1995. The survey, as well as literature reports and other information collected for the Task Force, showed problems affecting safety and effectiveness, as defined by the Task Force: validity and utility of predictive tests, laboratory quality, and appropriate use by healthcare providers and consumers. On the basis of these findings, the Task Force made several recommendations to ensure safe and effective genetic testing. The Secretary of Health and Human Services followed up one recommendation by creating the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing. One of its functions will be to implement other recommendations of the Task Force.

Genetic Techniques↗
PubMed1998

Bringing genetic tests into the clinic.

The tests tend to become possible soon after the discovery of a disease-related gene. Hence, they often become available before any interventions are known to be effective. They may also arrive before extensive knowledge regarding their clinical validity. To ensure their safe and effective use, physicians must face several issues--in which the crucial point may be not so much that a test is genetic as that it is used predictively.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗
PubMed1998

Prenatal genetic testing: content of discussions between obstetric providers and pregnant women.

OBJECTIVE: To document the content and accuracy of discussions about prenatal genetic testing between obstetric providers and pregnant women. METHODS: The first prenatal visits of 169 pregnant women with 21 obstetricians and 19 certified nurse-midwives were audiotaped and analyzed for whether a discussion of family history or genetic testing took place and if so, its length, content, and accuracy. RESULTS: Family history was discussed in 60% of visits, maternal serum marker screening in 60%, second-trimester ultrasonography for fetal anomalies in 34%, and for women at least 35 years old, amniocentesis or chorionic villus sampling (CVS) in 98%. The length of discussions of genetic testing averaged 2.5 minutes for women younger than 35 years of age and 6.9 minutes for older women. Topics discussed most often were the practical details of testing, the purpose of testing, and the fact that testing is voluntary. Discussions seldom were comprehensive. Obstetricians were more likely to make a recommendation about testing than were nurse-midwives and were less likely to indicate that testing is voluntary. Most women were satisfied with the amount of information, and the majority of women of advanced maternal age had made a decision about amniocentesis or CVS by the end of the visit. CONCLUSION: The information about genetic testing provided in the first prenatal visit is inadequate for ensuring informed autonomous decision-making. Guidelines addressing the content of these discussions should be developed with input from obstetricians, nurse-midwives, genetic counselors, and pregnant women.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Decision-making about breast cancer susceptibility testing: how similar are the attitudes of physicians, nurse practitioners, and at-risk women?

PURPOSE: To determine what consumers and providers would want to discuss about breast cancer susceptibility testing (BCST) and their preferred role in testing decisions. METHODS: We surveyed 426 at-risk women, 143 nurse practitioners, and 296 physicians in five specialties in Maryland. RESULTS: All groups believe it is important to discuss how the chance of breast cancer can be reduced and what the chances are of getting breast cancer if the test is positive. Both provider groups attributed more importance than consumers to discussing whether cancer can occur if the test is negative. Discussing the risk of depression and anxiety was more important to providers than consumers. Eighty-two percent of women would want their providers to make a recommendation about testing, but only 43% of nurse practitioners and 68% of physicians would do so. Eighteen percent of physicians underestimated the importance of informed consent for testing and 34% of discussing the risk of insurance discrimination. Fewer than 6% of women, if found to have a mutation, would be likely to undergo prophylactic mastectomy, whereas 12% of nurse practitioners and 34% of physicians would be likely to recommend such surgery. One third of respondents in all three groups supported testing a 13-year old daughter of a mutation-carrier. CONCLUSION: Physicians should place greater value on informed consent and discussing practical aspects of testing, and physicians and nurse practitioners should pay more attention to the limitations of testing children, insurance discrimination, and consumers' desire for provider recommendations. In light of the limited discordance between nurse practitioners and consumers, nurse practitioners can play an increasing role in education and counseling about BCST.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Educational material about genetic tests: does it provide key information for patients and practitioners?

Genetic testing for common conditions will be used increasingly in primary care, but resources for patient counseling are decreasing. It is also necessary that primary care practitioners be better equipped to do basic genetic counseling. Therefore, the quality of informational materials for practitioners and patients is important. It was unknown how often key elements recommended by policy groups were actually included in such material. It was our aim to determine the content of printed informational material for practitioners and patients on genetic testing. We performed (1) a telephone survey of organizations in the United States that developed genetic tests or services and (2) a content analysis of pamphlets obtained from these organizations to determine the presence of 10 critical elements necessary to evaluate the appropriateness and performance of the tests. Almost 95% (169/178) of organizations responded to our survey; 131/169 (78%) reported using informational materials. We analyzed 115 pamphlets collected from 125/131 (95%) organizations. Elements least frequently included in the pamphlets were risks and benefits, patient rights, and intended use or purpose of the test. Most frequently included were descriptions of the conditions detected by the test, and the appropriate patients for testing. Nearly one half of the pamphlets included some statement about the accuracy of the test, but most of these did not specify whether their statements referred to sensitivity, specificity, or predictive value. Overall, pamphlets tended to contain information that would aid in determining a patient's eligibility for a genetic test, but did not contain sufficient information about the tests themselves. Our results suggest that several critical elements need to be added to enhance informed choices by patients and physicians.

Benchmarking↗