National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference Statement: Family History and Improving Health.

University of Washington, Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Annals of internal medicine (Impact Factor: 17.81). 11/2009; 151(12):872-7. DOI: 10.1059/0003-4819-151-12-200912150-00165
Source: PubMed


National Institutes of Health consensus and state-of-the science statements are prepared by independent panels of health professionals and public representatives on the basis of 1) the results of a systematic literature review prepared under contract with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ); 2) presentations by investigators working in areas relevant to the conference questions during a 2-day public session; 3) questions and statements from conference attendees during open discussion periods that are part of the public session; and 4) closed deliberations by the panel during the remainder of the second day and morning of the third. This statement is an independent report of the panel and is not a policy statement of the National Institutes of Health or the U.S. government. The statement reflects the panel's assessment of medical knowledge available at the time the statement was written. Thus, it provides a "snapshot in time" of the state of knowledge on the conference topic. When reading the statement, keep in mind that new knowledge is inevitably accumulating through medical research.

8 Reads
  • Source
    • "Besides practical barriers with regard to time, expertise and financial reimbursement, they indicated that FH is not systematically registered and EMRs are not equipped to retrieve persons with a FH of T2D. This problem was reported in earlier research [15,32]. In the future, the development of tools to collect standardized FH that are compatible with EMRs may solve this obstacle [33]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Family history (FH) is considered an important factor to detect individuals at increased risk developing type 2 diabetes (T2D). Moreover, FH information could be used to personalise risk messages, which are assumed to increase risk-reducing behaviours. In this study, we aimed to explore Dutch health care professionals' attitudes regarding current or future uptake of a more extensive use of FH information and the family system in diabetes prevention. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with nineteen health care professionals from six general practices and four outpatient diabetes clinics. The use of FH information in opportunistic screening for T2D was explored, as well as the usability of a direct versus patient-mediated targeting strategy to reach persons with a FH of T2D. Three researchers analysed the interview transcripts separately. Dutch health care professionals considered FH an important risk factor in opportunistic screening for T2D. However, none of them used FH to promote risk-reducing behaviours. Directly targeting and educating patients known to have a FH of T2D was desirable for most primary care professionals, but not considered feasible. Findings indicated that FH information was not systematically gathered in primary care settings and electronic medical records were not equipped to retrieve persons with T2D running in their family. The idea of asking patients to pass on risk and preventive information was new to all interviewees, but was considered an acceptable strategy to reach persons with a FH of diabetes. Nevertheless, there were concerns about the accuracy of the messages delivered by the patients to their relatives. Practical barriers with regard to time, expertise, and financial reimbursement were also mentioned. There is great interest among healthcare professionals in primary as well as secondary care about the use of FH to prevent T2D, but there are significant barriers against such use. The removal of these barriers would depend on evidence showing the cost-effectiveness of FH-based strategies designed to prevent T2D.
    BMC Family Practice 03/2013; 14(1):31. DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-14-31 · 1.67 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Identifying optimal methods for encouraging patients' collection of FHH information is a critical step toward increasing the use of this information in clinical practice (Berg et al. 2009). FHH tools, which offer systematic approaches to capturing and documenting family history (Qureshi et al. 2009), hold promise in helping individuals collect and retain this information. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Little is known about African American women's collection of family health history (FHH) information and use of FHH tools. Most FHH research has investigated tools that use a biomedical paradigm, but other kinds of tools, such as those that include information about family social context, have been developed for use in diverse populations. Using mixed methods, we interviewed 32 African American women about behavioral steps to collecting FHH, family communication about health, and reactions to a biomedical FHH tool. Participants chose one of two FHH tools to take home. A follow-up call three weeks later assessed tool use. Many participants expressed support for writing down FHH information, but at baseline few had done so; most participants who had collected FHH information had done so verbally. Participants reacted positively to the biomedical FHH tool used during the interview, with many saying it allowed them to see patterns in their FHH. At follow-up, 67 % reported using their FHH tool, primarily to promote discussion among family members; only 32 % used the tool to write down FHH information. Although participants thought collecting FHH information was important and had positive reactions to both tools, the majority did not use the tools to write down information and instead collected FHH informally. These findings underline the importance of separating the components of FHH collection behaviors to analyze the steps used in FHH creation. Practitioners should consider additional methods of encouraging patients to create written FHHs in order to share the information with health care providers.
    Journal of community genetics 02/2013; 4(2). DOI:10.1007/s12687-013-0138-0
  • Source
    • "This study explored individual characteristics associated with perceived familiarity with and importance of FHH, factors that are important in identifying individuals who can be targeted in public health interventions to facilitate the dissemination of FHH within families. It should be noted that these measures are different from measures of accuracy of FHH knowledge, which have been reviewed in other studies (Berg et al. 2009). However, our results showed that the level of perceived familiarity with FHH was strongly associated with whether participants answered " don't know " to the FHH assessment questions regarding heart disease and diabetes. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Inadequate knowledge of family health history (FHH) continues to be a major obstacle limiting its usefulness in public health and clinical practice; strategies to facilitate FHH dissemination are needed. Data (N = 1,334) were obtained through waiting-room surveys completed by a diverse sample of patients attending three community health centers. Perceptions about the importance of genetic information (β = 0.13, p < 0.001; β = 0.11, p < 0.001) and higher genetic self-efficacy (β = 0.14, p < 0.001; β = 0.23, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with higher levels of perceived familiarity with and importance of FHH, respectively. Furthermore, beliefs about genetic causation of illnesses (β = 0.12, p < 0.001) and a wider reach of health communication within one's family (β = 0.15, p < 0.001) were associated with higher levels of perceived familiarity with one's FHH. Participants in the oldest group (>50 years) reported higher familiarity than those in the youngest (18-25 years). Those with higher familiarity were significantly less likely to answer "don't know" when reporting diabetes and heart disease diagnoses among immediate (OR = 0.35 and OR = 0.29, respectively) and extended (OR = 0.50 and OR = 0.46, respectively) family members. Having a wider health communication reach within a family may be beneficial in increasing familiarity with FHH; however, the reported levels of communication reach were limited among most participants. Women, older-generation family members, and those who believe in the importance of genetics in health or feel confident about using genetic information may be particularly important as targets of public health interventions to facilitate FHH dissemination within families.
    Journal of community genetics 05/2012; 3(4):285-95. DOI:10.1007/s12687-012-0097-x
Show more