Assessment of local provider engagement of an in-home collaborative model for remote genetic services

Genetics in Medicine Open Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2026-07-31 DOI:10.1016/j.gimo.2026.104486
Daniel Chavez-Yenter, Kevin Oeffinger, Brian Egleston, Elisabeth McCarty Wood, Sarah Howe, Sarah Brown, Janice Christiansen, Cara Cacioppo, Michelle Weinberg, Elena Elkin, Linda Fleisher, Rajia Mim, Santina Hernandez, Demetrios Ofidis, Dominique Fetzer, Tara O. Henderson, Angela Bradbury
{"title":"Assessment of local provider engagement of an in-home collaborative model for remote genetic services","authors":"Daniel Chavez-Yenter,&nbsp;Kevin Oeffinger,&nbsp;Brian Egleston,&nbsp;Elisabeth McCarty Wood,&nbsp;Sarah Howe,&nbsp;Sarah Brown,&nbsp;Janice Christiansen,&nbsp;Cara Cacioppo,&nbsp;Michelle Weinberg,&nbsp;Elena Elkin,&nbsp;Linda Fleisher,&nbsp;Rajia Mim,&nbsp;Santina Hernandez,&nbsp;Demetrios Ofidis,&nbsp;Dominique Fetzer,&nbsp;Tara O. Henderson,&nbsp;Angela Bradbury","doi":"10.1016/j.gimo.2026.104486","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>Clinical genetic testing demand has increased in the era of precision medicine. However, the availability of cancer genetic services remains limited in the United States, prompting a rise in telehealth delivery. Through our Telegenetics program, we seek to promote genetic service delivery across the United States, and here, we assess engagement through registrations with local providers using a service delivery model.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This report describes the Penn Telegenetics Program experience across 4 research and clinical activities using an in-home collaborative local provider model. We report the clinical procedures and our initial experience implementing this model across these 4 research and clinical activities in the Penn Telegenetics Program. We present descriptive findings of the registrations and, in cases of refusals, the rationale provided.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From 2018 to 2025, 473 providers (89.4%) successfully registered. Providers were predominantly MD/DO licensed (85.0%). Family medicine was the most frequent specialty (54.3%), followed by internal medicine (20.9%) and clinical oncology (11.8%). Most providers were in suburban locations by zip codes (56.2%); 20.1% were in rural zip codes. Only 56 providers declined collaboration (10.6%); the most common reasons reported were preferring local genetic services (22.5%) and not being comfortable as the ordering provider (22.5%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Our data demonstrate that most local providers are willing to collaborate with a centralized telegenetics program. Still, subsequent engagement from local providers in follow-up questions or other referrals remains a missed opportunity to improve telegenetics access. Refining procedures to increase collaborative care and engagement may provide opportunities to increase access to cancer genetic testing.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100576,"journal":{"name":"Genetics in Medicine Open","volume":"4 ","pages":"Article 104486"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13553557/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genetics in Medicine Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949774426009969","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Clinical genetic testing demand has increased in the era of precision medicine. However, the availability of cancer genetic services remains limited in the United States, prompting a rise in telehealth delivery. Through our Telegenetics program, we seek to promote genetic service delivery across the United States, and here, we assess engagement through registrations with local providers using a service delivery model.

Methods

This report describes the Penn Telegenetics Program experience across 4 research and clinical activities using an in-home collaborative local provider model. We report the clinical procedures and our initial experience implementing this model across these 4 research and clinical activities in the Penn Telegenetics Program. We present descriptive findings of the registrations and, in cases of refusals, the rationale provided.

Results

From 2018 to 2025, 473 providers (89.4%) successfully registered. Providers were predominantly MD/DO licensed (85.0%). Family medicine was the most frequent specialty (54.3%), followed by internal medicine (20.9%) and clinical oncology (11.8%). Most providers were in suburban locations by zip codes (56.2%); 20.1% were in rural zip codes. Only 56 providers declined collaboration (10.6%); the most common reasons reported were preferring local genetic services (22.5%) and not being comfortable as the ordering provider (22.5%).

Conclusion

Our data demonstrate that most local providers are willing to collaborate with a centralized telegenetics program. Still, subsequent engagement from local providers in follow-up questions or other referrals remains a missed opportunity to improve telegenetics access. Refining procedures to increase collaborative care and engagement may provide opportunities to increase access to cancer genetic testing.
远程遗传服务家庭协作模式的本地提供者参与评估。
目的:在精准医疗时代,临床基因检测需求增加。然而,在美国,癌症遗传服务的可用性仍然有限,这促使远程医疗服务的增加。通过我们的远程遗传项目,我们寻求在美国推广遗传服务,在这里,我们通过使用服务提供模式与当地供应商注册来评估参与情况。方法:本报告描述了宾夕法尼亚大学远程遗传项目在4项研究和临床活动中的经验,使用家庭协作本地提供者模式。我们报告了临床程序和我们在宾夕法尼亚大学远程遗传项目的这4项研究和临床活动中实施该模型的初步经验。我们提出注册的描述性结果,在拒绝的情况下,提供的理由。结果:2018 - 2025年,473家服务提供者注册成功,占89.4%。提供者主要是MD/DO许可(85.0%)。家庭医学是最常见的专科(54.3%),其次是内科(20.9%)和临床肿瘤学(11.8%)。按邮政编码划分,大多数医疗服务提供者位于郊区(56.2%);20.1%在农村地区。只有56家供应商拒绝合作(10.6%);报告中最常见的原因是更喜欢当地的遗传服务(22.5%)和作为订购提供者不舒服(22.5%)。结论:我们的数据表明,大多数地方提供者愿意与集中的远程遗传计划合作。尽管如此,当地医疗机构在后续问题或其他转诊方面的后续参与,仍然是一个错失的改善远程遗传服务的机会。改进程序以增加协作护理和参与可能为增加癌症基因检测提供机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书