Schwartz Lisa, Mackall Mia S, Arjunan Aishwarya, Goodenberger McKinsey, Mills Rachel, Ham Chloe, Witherington Sarah
Department of Biomedical Laboratory Sciences, The George Washington University, Ashburn, Virginia, USA.
Clinical Genetic Services, Natera, Inc., Austin, Texas, USA.
J Genet Couns. 2025 Feb;34(1):e1883. doi: 10.1002/jgc4.1883. Epub 2024 Feb 9.
Opportunities for genetic counselors to work in a variety of practice settings have greatly expanded, particularly in the laboratory. This study aimed to assess attitudes of genetic counselors working both within and outside of the laboratory setting regarding (1) the re-wording and/or expansion of key measures of genetic counselors' competency, including practice-based competencies (PBCs) and board examination, to include laboratory roles, (2) preparation and transferability of competencies developed in master's in genetic counseling (MGC) programs to different roles, (3) need of additional training for genetic counselors to practice in laboratory settings, and (4) preferred methods to obtain that training. An e-blast was sent to ABGC diplomats (N = 5458) with a link to a 29-item survey with 12 demographic questions to compare respondents to 2021 NSGC Professional Status Survey (PSS) respondents. Statistical comparisons were made between respondents working in the laboratory versus other settings. Among 399 responses received, there was an oversampling of respondents working in the laboratory (52% vs. 20% in PSS) and in non-direct patient care positions (47% vs. 25% in PSS). Most respondents agreed the PBCs were transferable to their work yet favored making the PBCs less direct patient care-focused, expanding PBCs to align with laboratory roles, adding laboratory-focused questions to the ABGC exam, and adding laboratory-focused training in MGC programs. Most agreed requiring post-MGC training would limit genetic counselors' ability to change jobs. Genetic counselors working in the laboratory reported being significantly less prepared by their MGC program for some roles (p < 0.001) or how the PBCs applied to non-direct patient care positions (p < 0.001). Only 53% of all respondents agreed that NSGC supports their professional needs and others in their practice area, and genetic counselors working in the laboratory were significantly less likely to agree (p = 0.002). These sentiments should be further explored.
遗传咨询师在各种实践环境中工作的机会大幅增加，尤其是在实验室环境中。本研究旨在评估在实验室环境内外工作的遗传咨询师对于以下方面的态度：（1）重新措辞和/或扩展遗传咨询师能力的关键指标，包括基于实践的能力（PBCs）和委员会考试，以纳入实验室角色；（2）遗传咨询硕士（MGC）项目中培养的能力向不同角色的准备情况和可转移性；（3）遗传咨询师在实验室环境中执业是否需要额外培训；（4）获得该培训的首选方法。向美国遗传咨询委员会（ABGC）的会员（N = 5458）发送了一封电子邮件，其中包含一个指向29项调查问卷的链接，该问卷有12个人口统计学问题，以便将受访者与2021年美国国家遗传咨询协会（NSGC）职业状况调查（PSS）的受访者进行比较。对在实验室工作的受访者与其他环境中的受访者进行了统计比较。在收到的399份回复中，在实验室工作的受访者（占52%，而PSS中为20%）和非直接患者护理岗位的受访者（占47%，而PSS中为25%）存在过度抽样。大多数受访者同意PBCs可转移到他们的工作中，但倾向于使PBCs减少对直接患者护理的关注，扩展PBCs以与实验室角色保持一致，在ABGC考试中增加针对实验室的问题，并在MGC项目中增加针对实验室的培训。大多数人同意要求MGC毕业后培训将限制遗传咨询师更换工作的能力。在实验室工作的遗传咨询师报告称，他们的MGC项目对某些角色的准备明显不足（p < 0.001），或者PBCs如何应用于非直接患者护理岗位方面也明显不足（p < 0.001）。所有受访者中只有53%同意NSGC支持他们的专业需求以及他们所在实践领域的其他人，而在实验室工作的遗传咨询师同意的可能性明显更低（p = 0.002）。这些观点应进一步探讨。
