Research Article

“What about FH of my child?” parents’ opinion on family history collection in preventive primary pediatric care

*Author for correspondence:

E-mail Address: e.syurina@maastrichtuniversity.nl

Department of Social Medicine, School for Public Health & Primary Care (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine & Life Sciences, Maastricht University, The Netherlands

^‡Authors contributed equally

Search for more papers by this author

Anne-Marie JM Gerritsen^‡

Department of Social Medicine, School for Public Health & Primary Care (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine & Life Sciences, Maastricht University, The Netherlands

^‡Authors contributed equally

Search for more papers by this author

Kristien Hens

Centre for Society & the Life Sciences (CSG), Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Frans JM Feron

Department of Social Medicine, School for Public Health & Primary Care (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine & Life Sciences, Maastricht University, The Netherlands

Search for more papers by this author

Published Online:3 Aug 2015https://doi.org/10.2217/pme.15.9

View article

Abstract

Objective: Family history (FH) in Preventive Primary Pediatric Care is to identify children at risk for complex diseases and provide personal preventive strategies. This study was to assess parents’ opinion on FH collection. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted. Among issues addressed were: former experiences with FH, knowledge about FH, family definition and sharing information about FH. Results: The importance of FH for participants depended on their knowledge, perceived family health status and former experiences. After insight into FH, parents shift to believing it to be important, but certain barriers exist in reporting FH. Conclusion: Parents suggest that the importance of FH should be more emphasized and more trusting relationship with Preventive Primary Pediatric Care should be invested in.

Keywords:

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

References

1 Guttmacher AE, Collins FS, Carmona RH. The family history – more important than ever. N. Engl. J. Med. 351(22), 2333–2336 (2004).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
2 Wilcken B. Newborn screening: how are we travelling, and where should we be going? J. Inherit. Metab. Dis. 34(3), 569–574 (2011).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
3 Rich EC, Burke W, Heaton CJ et al. Reconsidering the family history in primary care. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 19(3), 273–280 (2004).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
4 Trotter TL, Martin HM. Family history in pediatric primary care. Pediatrics 120(Suppl.), S60–S65 (2007).•• Provides insights into the potential use of family history (FH) in primary pediatric care.Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
5 Green RF. Summary of workgroup meeting on use of family history information in pediatric primary care and public health. Pediatrics 120(Suppl.), S87–S100 (2007).•• Focuses on the concrete advice on the directions for the use of FH in preventive primary pediatric care.Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
6 Valdez R, Yoon PW, Qureshi N, Green RF, Khoury MJ. Family history in public health practice: a genomic tool for disease prevention and health promotion. Ann. Rev. Public Health 31, 69–87 (2010).•• Forms nice arguments for the use of FH as a prevention and prediction tool.Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
7 Kanetzke EE, Lynch J, Prows CA, Siegel RM, Myers MF. Perceived utility of parent-generated family health history as a health promotion tool in pediatric practice. Clin. Pediatr. 50(8), 720–728 (2011).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
8 Valdez R, Greenlund KJ, Khoury MJ, Yoon PW. Is family history a useful tool for detecting children at risk for diabetes and cardiovascular diseases? A public health perspective. Pediatrics 120(Suppl.), S78–S86 (2007).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
9 Policy statement – The future of pediatrics: mental health competencies for pediatric primary care. Pediatrics 124(1), 410–421 (2009).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
10 Syurina EV, Brankovic I, Probst-Hensch N, Brand A. Genome-based health literacy: a new challenge for public health genomics. Public Health Gen. 14(4–5), 201–210 (2011).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
11 Syurina EV, Hens K, Dondorp WJ, Feron FJ. Family history of mental conditions in the preventive paediatric primary care: is it really used? Case of The Netherlands. Acta Paediatr. 103(3), 309–313 (2014).• Gives overview of the current use of FH in The Netherlands.Crossref, Google Scholar
12 Rinke ML, Mikat-Stevens N, Saul R, Driscoll A, Healy J, Tarini BA. Genetic services and attitudes in primary care pediatrics. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 164(2), 449–455 (2014).Crossref, Google Scholar
13 Alspach JG. The importance of family health history your patients’ and your own. Crit. Care Nurse 31(1), 10–15 (2011).Crossref, Google Scholar
14 Walter FM, Emery J. ‘Coming down the line’ – patients’ understanding of their family history of common chronic disease. Ann. Fam. Med. 3(5), 405–414 (2005).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
15 Walter FM, Emery J, Braithwaite D, Marteau TM. Lay understanding of familial risk of common chronic diseases: a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research. Ann. Fam. Med. 2(6), 583–594 (2004).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
16 Ozanne EM, O'connell A, Bouzan C et al. Bias in the reporting of family history: implications for clinical care. J. Genet. Couns. 21(4), 547–556 (2012).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
17 Facio FM, Feero WG, Linn A, Oden N, Manickam K, Biesecker LG. Validation of my family health portrait for six common heritable conditions. Genet. Med. 12(6), 370–375 (2010).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
18 Syurina EV, Hens K, Feron FJM. Literature review: use of family history for primary paediatric care as the next step towards use of genomics in healthcare. Curr. Pediatr. Rev. 9(4), 1573–3963 (2013).•• This review analyzes the available tools for pediatric care.Crossref, Google Scholar
19 Walter FM, Emery J. Perceptions of family history across common diseases: a qualitative study in primary care. Fam. Pract. 23(4), 472–480 (2006).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
20 Cameron LD, Marteau TM, Brown PM, Klein WM, Sherman KA. Communication strategies for enhancing understanding of the behavioral implications of genetic and biomarker tests for disease risk: the role of coherence. J. Behav. Med. 35(3), 286–298 (2012).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
21 Scheuner MT, Sieverding P, Shekelle PG. Delivery of genomic medicine for common chronic adult diseases: a systematic review. JAMA 299(11), 1320–1334 (2008).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
22 Wang C, O'Neill SM, Rothrock N et al. Comparison of risk perceptions and beliefs across common chronic diseases. Prev. Med. 48(2), 197–202 (2009).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
23 Claassen L, Henneman L, Janssens ACJ et al. Using family history information to promote healthy lifestyles and prevent diseases; a discussion of the evidence. BMC Public Health 10(1), 248 (2010).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
24 Ashida S, Goodman MS, Stafford J, Lachance C, Kaphingst KA. Perceived familiarity with and importance of family health history among a medically underserved population. J. Community Genet. 3(4), 285–295 (2012).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
25 Hulse NC, Ranade-Kharkar P, Post H, Wood GM, Williams MS, Haug PJ. Development and early usage patterns of a consumer-facing family health history tool. AMIA Ann. Symp. Proc. 2011 578–587 (2011).Medline, Google Scholar
26 Corbin JM, Strauss AL. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. (3th). SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, CA, USA (2008).Crossref, Google Scholar
27 Dierckx De, Casterlé B, Gastmans C, Bryon E, Denier Y. QUAGOL: a guide for qualitative data analysis. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 49(3), 360–371 (2012).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
28 Peace J, Valdez RS, Lutz KF. Data-based considerations for electronic family health history applications. Comput. Inform. Nurs. 30(1), 37–45 (2012).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
29 Acheson LS, Wang C, Zyzanski SJ et al. Family history and perceptions about risk and prevention for chronic diseases in primary care: a report from the family healthware impact trial. Genet. Med. 12(4), 212–218 (2010).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
30 Wermter A-K, Laucht M, Schimmelmann BG et al. From nature versus nurture, via nature and nurture, to gene X environment interaction in mental disorders. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 19(3), 199–210 (2010).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
31 Grossniklaus U, Kelly B, Ferguson-Smith AC, Pembrey M, Lindquist S. Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance: how important is it? Nat. Rev. Genet. 14(3), 228–235 (2013).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
32 Featherstone K, Atkinson P, Bhardawai A, Clarke A. Risky Relations, Family, Kinship and the New Genetics. (First Edition). Berg, Oxford, UK (2006).Google Scholar
33 Koehly LM, Ashida S, Goergen AF, Skapinsky KF, Hadley DW, Wilkinson AV. Willingness of Mexican–American adults to share family health history with healthcare providers. Am. J. Preven. Med. 40(6), 633–636 (2011).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
34 Hawkins-Walsh E. Turning primary care providers’ attention to child behavior: a review of the literature. J. Pediatr. Health Care 15(3), 115–122 (2001).Crossref, Medline, CAS, Google Scholar
35 Snyderman R, Langheier J. Prospective health care: the second transformation of medicine. Genome Biol. 7(2), 104 (2006).Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar

Vol. 12, No. 4

Metrics

Downloaded 72 times

History

Published online 3 August 2015

Published in print August 2015

Information

Keywords

Financial & competing interests disclosure

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

No writing assistance was utilized in the production of this manuscript.

Ethical conduct

The authors state that they have obtained appropriate institutional review board approval or have followed the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki for all human or animal experimental investigations. In addition, for investigations involving human subjects, informed consent has been obtained from the participants involved.

PDF download