Are you Danielle Lagrave?

Claim your profile

Publications (7)11.43 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Genetic tests are routinely ordered by health care providers (HCPs) within a wide range of medical specialties. Many providers have limited knowledge or experience with ordering and interpreting genetic tests; thus, test order errors are common. Rigorous review of genetic test orders by genetic counselors (GCs) can provide a direct financial benefit to medical institutions, patients and insurers. GCs at ARUP (Associated Regional University Pathologists) Laboratories routinely perform a preanalytic assessment of complex molecular genetic test orders that includes reviewing clinical and family history information and considering the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of ordered tests. GCs contact the ordering institution and/or HCP as needed to collect additional clinical information and confirm the test order or suggest alternative testing based on the provided information. A retrospective review of the GC-facilitated test changes over a 21-month period at ARUP laboratories was performed. Approximately 26% of all requests for complex genetic tests assessing germ line mutations were changed following GC review. Testing fees associated with canceled tests were summed to estimate the cost-savings resulting from GC-facilitated test reviews. The test review process resulted in an average reduction in charges to the referring institutions of $48,000.00 per month. GC review of genetic test orders for appropriateness and clinical utility reduces healthcare costs to hospitals, insurers, and patients. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A 01/2014; · 2.30 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In maternal serum screening for Down syndrome, a cutoff of 1 : 270 is often used as a decision point to recommend invasive confirmatory testing. However, it has not been established how well this or any other cutoff relates to patient preferences, that is, the values that pregnant women attach to various screening outcomes. The purpose of this study was to examine the clinical and economic tradeoffs of a wide range of risk cutoffs for the quadruple screen. Screening costs and outcomes for multiple risk cutoffs were modeled using a Monte Carlo simulation. The optimal cutoff for maternal serum screening depends on the relative values placed by the patient on different outcomes. Total societal costs were similar across the range of cutoffs. Given that different screening outcomes are optimized by different cutoff values, a one-size-fits-all approach may not be appropriate. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Prenatal Diagnosis 08/2013; · 2.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Nancy C Rose, Danielle Lagrave, Brent Hafen, Marc Jackson
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: First-trimester aneuploidy screening has high detection rates and low false-positive rates. Their use as well as the implementation of non-invasive prenatal testing may affect specialty training in prenatal diagnosis procedures. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive study of first-trimester aneuploidy screening and amniocentesis in an obstetric training program. Screening methods were tracked from their introduction in 2004 through 2011. The volume of amniocentesis procedures from 2000 to 2011 was evaluated. RESULTS: First-trimester screening tests increased from 283 to 1225 between 2005 and 2011, whereas genetic amniocenteses declined from 460 to 168 during the same period. The percent of older women who chose a first-trimester screen test rose from 12.7% to 44.2% CONCLUSION: First-trimester screening options reduce genetic amniocenteses available for training. Fetal medicine and general obstetrics training programs need to evaluate their clinical experience and determine whether simulation training methods are needed for education. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Prenatal Diagnosis 01/2013; · 2.68 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Neuroligin 1 (NLGN1) is one of five members of the neuroligin gene family and may represent a candidate gene for neurological disorders, as members of this family are involved in formation and remodeling of central nervous system synapses. NLGN1 is expressed predominantly in the central nervous system, where it dimerizes and then binds with β-neurexin to form a functional synapse. Mutations in neurexin 1 (NRXN1) as well as two other members of the neuroligin family, NLGN3 and NLGN4, have been associated with autism and mutations in NLGN4 have also been associated with intellectual disability, seizures, and EEG abnormalities. Genomic microarray is recommended for the detection of chromosomal gains or losses in patients with intellectual disability and multiple congenital anomalies. Results of uncertain significance are not uncommon. Parental studies can provide additional information by demonstrating that the imbalance is either de novo or inherited, and therefore is more or less likely to be causative of the clinical phenotype. However, the possibility that even inherited deletions and duplications may play a role in the phenotype of the proband cannot be excluded as many copy number variants associated with neurodevelopmental conditions show incomplete penetrance and may be inherited from an unaffected parent. Here, we report on a patient with a 2.2 Mb deletion at 3q26.3-3q26.32-encompassing the terminal end of NLGN1 and the entire NAALADL2 gene-detected by genomic microarray, and confirmed by FISH and real-time quantitative PCR. The same size deletion was subsequently found in her healthy, asymptomatic, adult mother. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    American Journal of Medical Genetics Part A 11/2011; · 2.30 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Down syndrome is one of the most common conditions encountered in the genetics clinic. Due to improvements in healthcare, educational opportunities, and community inclusion over the past 30 years, the life expectancy and quality of life for individuals with Down syndrome have significantly improved. As prenatal screening and diagnostic techniques have become more enhanced and widely available, genetic counselors can expect to frequently provide information and support following a new diagnosis of Down syndrome. This guideline was written for genetic counselors and other healthcare providers regarding the communication of a diagnosis of Down syndrome to ensure that families are consistently given up-to-date and balanced information about the condition, delivered in a supportive and respectful manner.
    Journal of Genetic Counseling 05/2011; 20(5):432-41. · 1.45 Impact Factor
  • Danielle LaGrave, Nancy Rose, Brent Hafen, Marc Jackson
    American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology - AMER J OBSTET GYNECOL. 01/2011; 204(1).
  • Danielle Lagrave, Nancy Rose, Edward Ashwood
    American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology - AMER J OBSTET GYNECOL. 01/2009; 201(6).