Systematic review identifies barriers and facilitators impacting nurses' roles in genetic services, implying needed interventions for improved delivery.
Nurses play a crucial role in the provision of genetic services, yet their capacity to deliver these services is often constrained by various barriers. Understanding these barriers and identifying facilitators is essential for optimizing genetic services delivery in nursing practice. This systematic review aimed to explore the barriers and facilitators influencing nurses' roles in providing genetic services, including genetic counseling, testing, and patient management. A comprehensive search across multiple databases yielded 1,275 articles. After de-duplication and screening, 12 studies published between 2001 and 2024 were included. These studies, conducted in nine countries, utilized qualitative and quantitative approaches. Data was synthesized narratively, focusing on key themes related to barriers and facilitators. Barriers were identified across six domains: gaps in educational preparedness, insufficient knowledge, administrative hurdles, negative attitudes, logistical difficulties, and environmental limitations. Common challenges included knowledge deficits, role ambiguity, time constraints, and cultural variations. Facilitators were grouped into five domains: educational support, role expansion, integration across specialties, positive attitudes, and policy/institutional support. Key enablers included genomic education programs, multidisciplinary teamwork, and structured institutional policies. Barriers and facilitators to nurses' provision of genetic services are multifaceted, spanning individual, institutional, and systemic factors. Addressing these challenges through targeted interventions, such as enhancing genomic education and fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, can significantly improve genetic services delivery in nursing practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Latha et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: