With the emergence of electronic medical records and patient portals, patients are increasingly able to access their health records, including laboratory reports. However, laboratory reports are usually written for clinicians rather than patients, who may not understand much of the information in the report. While several professional guidelines define the content of test reports, there are no guidelines to inform the development of a patient-friendly laboratory report. In this Opinion, we consider patient barriers to comprehension of lab results and suggest several options to reformat the lab report to promote understanding of test results and their significance to patient care, and to reduce patient anxiety and confusion. In particular, patients’ health literacy, genetic literacy, e-health literacy and risk perception may influence their overall understanding of lab results and affect patient care. We propose four options to reformat lab reports: 1) inclusion of an interpretive summary section, 2) a summary letter to accompany the lab report, 3) development of a patient user guide to be provided with the report, and 4) a completely revised patient-friendly report. The complexity of genetic and genomic test reports poses a major challenge to patient understanding that warrants the development of a report more appropriate for patients.

Prior to statewide newborn screening (NBS) for spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) in North Carolina, U.S.A., we offered voluntary screening through the Early Check (EC) research study. Here, we describe the EC experience from October 2018 through December 2020. We enrolled a total of 12,065 newborns and identified one newborn with 0 copies of SMN1 and two copies of SMN2, consistent with severe early onset of SMA. We also detected one false positive result, likely stemming from an unrelated blood disorder associated with a low white blood cell count. We evaluated the timing of NBS for babies enrolled prenatally (n = 932) and postnatally (n = 11,133) and reasons for delays in screening and reporting. Although prenatal enrollment led to faster return of results (median = 13 days after birth), results for babies enrolled postnatally were still available within a timeframe (median = 21 days after birth) that allowed the opportunity to receive essential treatment early in life. We evaluated an SMA q-PCR screening method at two separate time points, confirming the robustness of the assay. The pilot project provided important information about SMA screening in anticipation of forthcoming statewide expansion as part of regular NBS.

The detection of consanguinity by the presence of multiple regions of homozygosity (ROH) is not an uncommon occurrence in clinical laboratories performing SNP microarray analysis. Reporting practices amongst laboratories are highly variable, due in part to differences in testing platforms, threshold parameters, language utilized, and laboratory policies. While guidance documents have provided a framework for detection and reporting practices, and will doubtless serve to harmonize the field, there are still many facets of the testing that remain at the discretion of the performing laboratory. Clinician and patient education remain a high priority. In the clinical laboratory, these homozygous segments are often examined to identify genes associated with a phenotype that matches that of the proband and autosomal recessive inheritance. While the detection of these ROH is possible with whole genome sequencing, it currently requires special algorithms be utilized, an uncommon practice in most clinical laboratories currently performing this type of testing.