Identifying Potential Monogenic Genetics Referrals in Primary Care: Impact of Genetic Counselor Chart Review

Approximately 10% of individuals have a rare disease, many of which are genetic. These patients often see primary care physicians (PCPs) and could be referred for genetic assessment. Literature describes barriers to discussing genetics in primary-care, including PCP knowledge gaps. Genetic counselors (GCs) may address those gaps. To understand the proportion of patients with a potential monogenic condition in Mayo Clinic Florida Family Medicine, a GC reviewed the electronic medical record (EMR) and placed a prompt noting an "indicator," for possible genetics referrals on PCP schedules. Post-visit documentation was reviewed for PCP response. Descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney U tests were performed. Thirteen PCPs participated, with 262 patients reviewed over 10 months. Eighty patients (30.5%) had an indicator, most commonly for a personal or family history of cancer (73.8%). Sixty-six (82.5%) patients with an indicator had a subsequent PCP visit and 42 (63.6%) lacked documentation acknowledging the indicator. Of the remaining 24 (36.4%), 11 (45.8%) were referred to genetics and 7 (29.2%) declined further evaluation. Overall, 4.2% (11) of the reviewed population had a genetics referral, which represents 16.7% of patients with an indicator who saw their PCP. The GC spent more time reviewing charts with indicators than charts without indicators (median [IQR], 10 [6-10] vs. 5 [4-8] minutes; Mann-Whitney U = 3859.5; p < 0.001). This study revealed patients who could benefit from genetic evaluation present in primary-care, but even with GC assistance to identify these patients via EMR review, many times PCPs do not document the potential genetic concern. A passive GC role may be insufficient, as fewer than half of indicators were acknowledged and only 16.7% resulted in referral. More active strategies, such as GC counseling within the primary-care clinic, and interventions addressing educational, structural, or time-based barriers, should be explored.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Published
2026-10-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.70309
Primary Topic
Healthcare Systems and Technology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Identifying Potential Monogenic Genetics Referrals in Primary Care: Impact of Genetic Counselor Chart Review

Courtney B. Graddy, Sarah A. Kroc, Adrianna D.M. Clapp, Richard John Presutti et al.
Journal of Genetic Counseling
Healthcare Systems and Technology
article

Identifying Potential Monogenic Genetics Referrals in Primary Care: Impact of Genetic Counselor Chart Review

Courtney B. Graddy, Sarah A. Kroc, Adrianna D.M. Clapp, Richard John Presutti, Laura Duncan, Christabel Opara, Mohammad Kahrizi, Jennifer L. Kemppainen
article en

Abstract

Approximately 10% of individuals have a rare disease, many of which are genetic. These patients often see primary care physicians (PCPs) and could be referred for genetic assessment. Literature describes barriers to discussing genetics in primary-care, including PCP knowledge gaps. Genetic counselors (GCs) may address those gaps. To understand the proportion of patients with a potential monogenic condition in Mayo Clinic Florida Family Medicine, a GC reviewed the electronic medical record (EMR) and placed a prompt noting an "indicator," for possible genetics referrals on PCP schedules. Post-visit documentation was reviewed for PCP response. Descriptive statistics and Mann-Whitney U tests were performed. Thirteen PCPs participated, with 262 patients reviewed over 10 months. Eighty patients (30.5%) had an indicator, most commonly for a personal or family history of cancer (73.8%). Sixty-six (82.5%) patients with an indicator had a subsequent PCP visit and 42 (63.6%) lacked documentation acknowledging the indicator. Of the remaining 24 (36.4%), 11 (45.8%) were referred to genetics and 7 (29.2%) declined further evaluation. Overall, 4.2% (11) of the reviewed population had a genetics referral, which represents 16.7% of patients with an indicator who saw their PCP. The GC spent more time reviewing charts with indicators than charts without indicators (median [IQR], 10 [6-10] vs. 5 [4-8] minutes; Mann-Whitney U = 3859.5; p < 0.001). This study revealed patients who could benefit from genetic evaluation present in primary-care, but even with GC assistance to identify these patients via EMR review, many times PCPs do not document the potential genetic concern. A passive GC role may be insufficient, as fewer than half of indicators were acknowledged and only 16.7% resulted in referral. More active strategies, such as GC counseling within the primary-care clinic, and interventions addressing educational, structural, or time-based barriers, should be explored.

Journal of Genetic CounselingVol. 35(6)
Mayo Clinic (US), Mayo Clinic in Florida (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Healthcare Systems and Technology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon