The profession of genetic counseling (also called genetic counselling in many countries) began nearly 50 years ago in the United States, and has grown internationally in the past 30 years. While there have been many papers describing the profession of genetic counseling in individual countries or regions, data remains incomplete and has been published in diverse journals with limited access. As a result of the 2016 Transnational Alliance of Genetic Counseling (TAGC) conference in Barcelona, Spain, and the 2017 World Congress of Genetic Counselling in the UK, we endeavor to describe as fully as possible the global state of genetic counseling as a profession. We estimate that in 2018 there are nearly 7000 genetic counselors with the profession established or developing in no less than 28 countries.

Supporting consultands to communicate risk information with their relatives is key to obtaining the full benefits of genetic health care. To understand how health-care professionals address this issue in clinical practice and what interventions are used specifically to assist consultands in their communication of genetic information to appropriate relatives, we conducted a systematic review. Four electronic databases and four subject-specific journals were searched for papers published, in English, between January 1997 and May 2014. Of 2926 papers identified initially, 14 papers met the inclusion criteria for the review and were heterogeneous in design, setting and methods. Thematic data analysis has shown that dissemination of information within families is actively encouraged and supported by professionals. Three overarching themes emerged: (1) direct contact from genetic services: sending letters to relatives of mutation carriers; (2) professionals’ encouragement of initially reluctant consultands to share relevant information with at-risk relatives and (3) assisting consultands in communicating genetic information to their at-risk relatives, which included as subthemes (i) psychoeducational guidance and (ii) written information aids. Findings suggest that professionals’ practice and interventions are predicated on the need to proactively encourage family communication. We discuss this in the context of what guidance of consultands by professionals might be appropriate, as best practices to facilitate family communication, and of the limits to non-directiveness in genetic counselling.

At least 10 % of patients seen in primary care are said to have a condition in which genetics has an influence. However, patients at risk of genetic disease may not be recognised, while those who seek advice may not be referred or managed appropriately. Primary care practitioners lack knowledge of genetics and genetic testing relevant for daily practice and feel inadequate to deliver genetic services. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate genetics educational interventions in the context of primary care. Following the process for systematic reviews developed by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, we conducted a search of five relevant electronic databases. Primary research papers were eligible for inclusion if they included data on outcomes of interventions regarding genetics education for primary care practitioners. The results from each paper were coded and grouped under themes. Eleven studies were included in the review. The five major themes identified inductively (post hoc) were: prior experience, changes in confidence, changes in knowledge, changes in practice, satisfaction and feedback. In five of the studies, knowledge of practitioners was improved following the educational programmes, but this tended to be in specific topic areas, while practitioner confidence improved in six studies. However, there was little apparent change to practice. There are insufficient studies of relevant quality to inform educational interventions in genetics for primary care practitioners. Educational initiatives should be assessed using changes in practice, as well as in confidence and knowledge, to determine if they are effective in causing significant changes in practice in genetic risk assessment and appropriate management of patients.

Clinical genetic services have progressed significantly the last few decades. This has led to the need for non-medical health-care professionals working as genetic counsellors in Europe and worldwide. However, there is no unified approach to genetic counsellors’ role in health-care services in Europe, as in most countries the profession is still emerging and the educational backgrounds diverge noticeably, within and between countries. This qualitative study aims to describe the potential added value of genetic counsellors in clinical genetics teams and to explore their tasks and responsibilities in different European countries. A total of 143 participants providing genetic counselling in Europe at the time of the survey responded. The results show differences in activities of genetic counsellors, although there is a wide range of roles, which are similar. The ability to establish a quality relationship with consultands was frequently mentioned as one of the strengths of genetic counsellors, as well as a patient-centred approach. It is believed that genetic counsellors add a more holistic approach of psychosocial and familial dimensions of genetic concerns to the multidisciplinary teams. This study provides examples of successful integration of genetic counsellors in teams, as complementariness with medical geneticist became clear in several cases. Although the added value of genetic counsellors was manifested, professional recognition of genetic counsellors across Europe is still needed in order to support the quality of patients care and safety of practice.