Advertisement

Journal of Community Genetics

, Volume 2, Issue 4, pp 191–200 | Cite as

Tracking clinical genetic services for newborns identified through newborn dried bloodspot screening in the United States—lessons learned

  • Judith Livingston
  • Bradford L. TherrellJr
  • Marie Y. Mann
  • Carolyn Stady Anderson
  • Katherine Christensen
  • Jerome L. Gorski
  • Dorothy K. Grange
  • Dawn Peck
  • Margy Roberston
  • Sharmini Rogers
  • Maura Taylor
  • Celia I. Kaye
Original Article

Abstract

To determine how US newborn dried bloodspot screening (NDBS) programs obtain patient-level data on clinical genetic counseling services offered to families of newborns identified through newborn NDBS and the extent to which newborns and their families receive these services. These data should serve to inform programs and lead to improved NDBS follow-up services. Collaborations were established with three state NDBS programs that reported systematically tracking genetic counseling services to newborns and their families identified through NDBS. A study protocol and data abstraction form were developed and IRB approvals obtained. Data from three state NDBS programs on a total of 151 patients indicated that genetic services are documented systematically only by metabolic clinics, most often by genetic counselors. Data from 69 endocrinology patients indicated infrequent referrals for genetic services; as expected higher for congenital adrenal hyperplasia than congenital hypothyroidism. Endocrinology patients were often counseled by physicians. While systematic tracking of genetic counseling services may be desirable for quality assurance of NDBS follow-up services, current systems do not appear conducive to this practice. Clinical records are not typically shared with NDBS programs and tracking of follow-up clinical genetic services has not been generally defined as a NDBS program responsibility. Rather, tracking of clinical services, while recognized as useful data, has been viewed by NDBS programs as a research project. The associated IRB requirements for patient-related research may pose an additional challenge. National guidance for NDBS programs that define quality genetic service indicators and monitoring responsibilities are needed. US experiences in this regard may provide information that can assist developing programs in avoiding tracking issues.

Keywords

Newborn dried bloodspot screening Follow-up Genetic services Genetic counseling IRB 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This project was supported through a cooperative agreement between the Maternal and Child Health Bureau, Genetic Services Branch and the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Department of Pediatrics, HRSA Grant #U32MC00148. Opinions stated herein are those of the authors and not necessarily of the Health Resources and Services Administration or Department of Health and Human Services.

The authors would like to express appreciation to the following individuals who were also associated with the project for their contributions: Susan A. Berry, MD, University of Minnesota Amplatz Children’s Hospital; Krista Redlinger-Grosse, CGC, University of Minnesota Amplatz Children’s Hospital; Gary S. Gottesman, MD, Saint Louis University School of Medicine; Mark McCann, MS, Minnesota Department of Health; Chanika Phornphutkul, MD, Rhode Island Hospital; Julie Raburn-Miller, Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services and Kristi Zonno, MS, CGC.

Financial relationship disclosure

The authors have no commercial association that might pose or create a conflict of interest with the information presented in this manuscript, neither consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interests, patent licensing arrangements, payments for conducting or publicizing a study described in the manuscript.

This project was supported through a cooperative agreement between the Maternal and Child Health Bureau, Genetic Services Branch and the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, Department of Pediatrics, HRSA Grant #U32MC00148.

References

  1. Alexander D, van Dyck P (2006) A vision of the future of newborn screening. Pediatrics 117(5):S350–S354PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. American Academy of Pediatrics and Newborn Screening Task Force (2000) Serving the family from birth to medical home—newborn screening: a blueprint for the future. Pediatrics 106:383–427Google Scholar
  3. Section on Hematology/Oncology, Committee on Genetics of American Academy of Pediatrics (2002) Health supervision for children with sickle cell disease. Pediatrics 109:526–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. American College of Medical Genetics’ Expert Group (2006) Newborn screening: toward a uniform screening panel and system – main report. Genet Med 8(suppl):12S–53SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borrajo GJC (2007) Newborn screening in Latin America at the beginning of the 21st Century. J Inherit Metabol Dis 30:466–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Botkin JR, Anderson R, Staes C, Longo N (2009) Developing a national registry for conditions identifiable through newborn screening. Genet Med 11(3):176–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ciske DJ, Haavisto A, Laxova A (2001) Genetic counseling and neonatal screening for cystic fibrosis: an assessment of the communication process. Pediatrics 107:699–705PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Grody W, Howell R (2010) The fate of newborn screening blood spots. Pediatr Res 67(3):237PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hinman AR, Mann MY, Singh RH (2009) Newborn dried bloodspot screening: mapping the clinical and public health components and activities. Genet Med 11(6):418–424PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hoff T, Hoyt A, Therrell B, Ayoob M (2006) Exploring barriers to long-term follow-up in newborn screening programs. Genet Med 8(9):563–570PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hoff T, Ayoob M, Therrell B (2007) Long-term follow-up data collection and use in state newborn screening programs. Arch Pediatr Adoles Med 161(10):994–1000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Institute of Medicine (1988) The future of public health. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp 140–142Google Scholar
  13. Kaye CI, Livingston J, Canfield MA, Mann MY, Lloyd-Puryear MA, Therrell BL (2007) Assuring clinical genetic services for newborns identified through U.S. newborn screening programs. Genet Med 9(8):518–527PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kemper AR, Boyle CA, Aceves J, Dougherty D, Figge J, Fisch JL, Hinman AR, Green CL, Kus CA, Miller J, Robertson D, Therrell B, Lloyd-Puryear M, van Dyck P, Howell RR (2008) Long-term follow-up after diagnosis resulting from newborn screening: statement of the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Service’s Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders and Genetic Diseases in Newborns and Children. Genet Med 10(4):259–261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Krotoski D, Namaste S, Raouf RK, El Nekhely I, Hindi-Alexander M, Engelson G, Hanson JW, Howell RR, MENA NBS Steering Committee (2009) Conference report: second conference of the Middle East and North Africa newborn screening initiative: partnerships for sustainable newborn screening infrastructure and research opportunities. Genet Med 11(9):663–668PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act of 2007. Available at: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:s1858. Accessed February 8, 2010.
  17. Padilla CD, Therrell BL (2007) Newborn screening in the Asia Pacific Region. J Inherit Metabol Dis 30:490–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Padilla CD, Krotoski D, Therrell BL (2010) Newborn screening progress in developing countries – overcoming internal barriers. Sem Perinatol 34(2):145–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pass KA, Lane PA, Fernhoff PM, Hinton CF, Panny SR, Parks JS, Pelias MZ, Rhead WJ, Ross SI, Wethers DL, Elsas JL (2000) US newborn screening system guidelines II: follow-up of children, diagnosis, management, and evaluation. Statement of the Council of Regional Networks for Genetic Services. J Pediatrics 137(suppl):S1–S46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Saadallah AA, Rashed MS (2007) Newborn screening: Experiences in the Middle East and North Africa. J Inherit Metabol Dis 30:482–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Therrell BL (2001) U.S. newborn screening policy dilemmas for the twenty-first century. Molec Genet Metab 74:64–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Therrell BL, Panny SR, Davidson A, Eckman J, Hannon WH, Henson MA, Hillard M, Kling S, Levy H, Meaney FJ, McCabe ERB, Mordaunt V, Pass K, Shapira E, Tuerck J (1992) US newborn screening system guidelines: statement of the Council of Regional Networks for Genetic Services. Screening 1:135–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Title V Today. Available at https://perfdata.hrsa.gov/MCHB/TVISReports/LearnMore/TitleVToday.aspx. Accessed March 31, 2010
  24. Tuerck J, Dhondt J-L, King P, Lim BG, Lorey F, Mann M, Marriage B, Miller J, Reichert W, Therrell B (2006) Newborn screening follow-up; approved guideline: CLSI document I/LA27-A. Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute, WayneGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Judith Livingston
    • 1
    • 2
    • 11
  • Bradford L. TherrellJr
    • 1
    • 2
  • Marie Y. Mann
    • 3
  • Carolyn Stady Anderson
    • 4
  • Katherine Christensen
    • 5
  • Jerome L. Gorski
    • 6
  • Dorothy K. Grange
    • 7
  • Dawn Peck
    • 6
  • Margy Roberston
    • 4
  • Sharmini Rogers
    • 8
  • Maura Taylor
    • 9
  • Celia I. Kaye
    • 10
  1. 1.Department of PediatricsUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at San AntonioSan AntonioUSA
  2. 2.National Newborn Screening and Genetics Resource CenterAustinUSA
  3. 3.Maternal and Child Health BureauHealth Resources and Services AdministrationRockvilleUSA
  4. 4.Maternal and Child Health SectionMinnesota Department of HealthSt. PaulUSA
  5. 5.Department of PediatricsSaint Louis University School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA
  6. 6.Department of Child HealthUniversity of Missouri-Columbia School of MedicineColumbiaUSA
  7. 7.Department of PediatricsWashington University in St. Louis School of MedicineSt. LouisUSA
  8. 8.Bureau of Genetics and Healthy Childhood, Missouri Department of Health and Senior ServicesJefferson CityUSA
  9. 9.Children’s Neurodevelopment CenterRhode Island HospitalProvidenceUSA
  10. 10.Office of EducationUniversity of Colorado School of MedicineDenverUSA
  11. 11.Department of Pediatrics, National Newborn Screening and Genetics Resource CenterUniversity of Texas Health Science Center at San AntonioAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations