Assessing Burnout and Well-Being in Higher Education Health Science Faculty

This study aimed to examine and compare the extent of burnout among health science faculty at a higher education institution and their self-reported perception of well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. The design of the study was cross-sectional, descriptive survey research. An electronic questionnaire was developed to measure the constructs of burnout and well-being. Validated instruments used in the survey included the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory (OLBI) and the World Health Organization-5 Well-being Index. The Qualtrics ® platform was used to distribute the survey to all full-time faculty within the College of Health Sciences. 45 respondents from nursing, community and environmental health, kinesiology, social work, respiratory care, allied health sciences, and radiologic sciences completed the survey. Significant differences were observed in the extent of burnout and perception of well-being between faculty members who had clinical teaching responsibilities within their faculty role compared to those who did not, p = 0.005, Partial Eta Squared = 0.318. Faculty with a 9-month contract appointment had significantly lower OLBI-Disengagement scores (p = 0.024) and OLBI-Full Burnout scores (p = 0.047) compared with those with another contract length. There was a significantly negative relationship between the extent of burnout and perception of well-being. In this sample of health science faculty, burnout, as characterized by increased exhaustion and disengagement, was moderately prevalent and associated with poorer well-being

PARC Report: A Perspective on the State of Clinical Pharmacogenomics Testing

In this Perspective, the authors discuss the state of pharmacogenomics testing addressing a number of advances, challenges and barriers, including legal ramifications, changes to the regulatory landscape, coverage of testing and the implications of direct-to-consumer genetic testing on the provision of care to patients. Patient attitudes toward pharmacogenomics testing and associated costs will play an increasingly important role in test acquisition and subsequent utilization in a clinical setting. Additional key steps needed include: further research trials demonstrating clinical utility and cost–effectiveness of pharmacogenetic testing, evidence review to better integrate genomic information into clinical practice guidelines in target therapeutic areas to help providers identify patients that may benefit from pharmacogenetic testing and engagement with payers to create a path to reimbursement for pharmacogenetic tests that currently have sufficient evidence of clinical utility. Increased adoption of testing by payers and improved reimbursement practices will be needed to overcome barriers, especially as the healthcare landscape continues to shift toward a system of value-based care

Patient Care Situations Benefiting from Pharmacogenomic Testing

Purpose of Review Pharmacogenomics is an evolving area in precision medicine that aims to identify patients who have variable drug response, detect those at risk for developing adverse events, and guide drug dosing. Guidelines for optimization of PGx testing are available for a number of drug-gene pairs, and evidence supporting the clinical utility of this service is growing in specific patient contexts. This report reviews a variety of patient care situations in which evidence is emerging to show patient benefit from pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing. Recent Findings Preemptive PGx testing minimizes delays in treatment, reducing costs and time to therapeutic effect; however, preemptive testing is currently not feasible in all healthcare settings. Therefore, specific patient care situations that could benefit from PGx testing to be prioritized include medications requiring PGx testing, adverse drug reactions, therapeutic failures, polypharmacy, special populations, and specialty care settings such as cardiology, oncology, and psychiatry. Summary Although preemptive PGx testing is likely the best option for patient care, implementation challenges are impeding its uptake. PGx testing is beneficial and more feasible in certain patient situations and may be a starting point for implementation of PGx testing in a care setting. Continued efforts to evaluate patient and provider use and outcomes of PGx testing services will be helpful in informing the current evidence base and standard of care

Facing the Challenge of Genetic Counselors\u27 Need for Rapid Continuing Education About Genomic Technologies

The last couple of decades have seen the rapid advancement of genomic technologies (GT) and their equally rapid adoption into clinical testing. Regardless of specialty, all genetic counselors are unified by the fundamental goal to aid in diagnosing patient\u27s genetic disease underscoring the importance for genetic counselors to maintain an in-depth understanding of GT. The National Society of Genetic Counselors’ (NSGC) GT Special Interest Group conducted an online survey of NSGC members to assess current genomic technologies knowledge gaps. A total of 171 individuals from a variety of primary work settings completed the survey sufficiently to be included in the analysis. The majority of respondents received their degree in genetic counseling in more recent years (2000–2015). On average across all technologies, \u3e70% of respondents deemed knowledge of GTs as important for successful job performance, 55% responded that additional job training in GTs is needed to successfully perform job functions, and only 28% responded that graduate training in GTs was good. Overall, the data show that participating genetic counselors perceive that their knowledge of GTs is inadequate while it is a key component of their jobs. These results have implications both for training programs and for continuing education efforts. These data can be used as a starting point for additional research into GT educational needs of genetic counselors