The expectations and realities of nutrigenomic testing in australia: A qualitative study

Erin Tutty; Chriselle Hickerton; Bronwyn Terrill; Belinda McClaren; Rigan Tytherleigh; Elaine Stackpoole; Jaqueline Savard; Ainsley Newson; Anna Middleton; Amy Nisselle; Marie Cusack; Melissa Adamski; Clara Gaff; Sylvia Metcalfe

doi:10.1111/hex.13216

The expectations and realities of nutrigenomic testing in australia: A qualitative study

Health Expect. 2021 Apr;24(2):670-686. doi: 10.1111/hex.13216. Epub 2021 Feb 26.

Authors

Erin Tutty^{1

2}, Chriselle Hickerton^{1

3}, Bronwyn Terrill^{3

4

5}, Belinda McClaren^{1

2

3}, Rigan Tytherleigh^{1

2}, Elaine Stackpoole^{1

2}, Jaqueline Savard^{4

6}, Ainsley Newson^{4

6}, Anna Middleton^{7

8}, Amy Nisselle^{1

2

3}, Marie Cusack^{3

9}, Melissa Adamski¹⁰, Clara Gaff^{1

2

3

11}, Sylvia Metcalfe^{1

2

3}

Affiliations

¹ Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
² Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
³ Australian Genomics Health Alliance, Victoria, Australia.
⁴ Kinghorn Centre for Clinical Genomics, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
⁵ St. Vincent's Clinical School, UNSW, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
⁶ Sydney Health Ethics, the University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
⁷ Society and Ethics Research, Connecting Science, Wellcome Genome Campus, Cambridge, UK.
⁸ Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
⁹ Centre for Genetics Education, NSW Health, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
¹⁰ Department of Nutrition, Dietetics and Food, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
¹¹ The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Abstract

Background: Consumer genomic testing for nutrition and wellness, (nutritional genomics), is becoming increasingly popular. Concurrently, health-care practitioners (HPs) working in private practice (including doctors interested in integrative medicine, private genetic counsellors, pharmacists, dieticians, naturopaths and nutritionists) are involved as test facilitators or interpreters.

Objective: To explore Australian consumers' and HPs' experiences with nutrigenomic testing.

Method: Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted using predominantly purposive sampling. The two data sets were analysed individually, then combined, using a constant comparative, thematic approach.

Results: Overall, 45 interviews were conducted with consumers (n = 18) and HPs (n = 27). Many of the consumer interviewees experienced chronic ill-health. Nutrigenomic testing was perceived as empowering and a source of hope for answers. While most made changes to their diet/supplements post-test, self-reported health improvements were small. A positive relationship with their HP appeared to minimize disappointment. HPs' adoption and views of nutrigenomic testing varied. Those enthusiastic about testing saw the possibilities it could offer. However, many felt nutrigenomic testing was not the only 'tool' to utilize when offering health care.

Discussion: This research highlights the important role HPs play in consumers' experiences of nutrigenomics. The varied practice suggests relevant HPs require upskilling in this area to at least support their patients/clients, even if nutrigenomic testing is not part of their practice.

Patient or public contribution: Advisory group included patient/public group representatives who informed study design; focus group participants gave feedback on the survey from which consumer interviewees were sourced. This informed the HP data set design. Interviewees from HP data set assisted with snowball sampling.

Keywords: MTHFR; complementary/alternative medicine; direct-to-consumer; nutrigenetics personal genomic testing; nutrigenomics; utritional genomics.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Australia
Focus Groups
Humans
Motivation*
Nutrigenomics*
Qualitative Research

Grants and funding

206194/WT_/Wellcome Trust/United Kingdom