Yonsei Med J.  2020 Feb;61(2):192-197. 10.3349/ymj.2020.61.2.192.

Views on Precision Medicine among Health Professionals in Korea: A Mixed Methods Study

• Cho HN
• Shin SY
• Hwangbo B
• Chang YJ
• Cho J
• Kong SY
• Choi KS
• Lee ES

• KMID: 2468495
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3349/ymj.2020.61.2.192

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate awareness, attitudes, and perspectives on precision medicine among health professionals in Korea and to identify issues that need to be addressed before implementing precision medicine. Mixed methods research was applied. For qualitative research, a semi-structured focus group interview was conducted with six health professionals. For quantitative research, a self-reported survey was administered. A total of 542 health professionals participated in the survey, and 526 completed the entire questionnaire. Health professionals showed positive attitudes toward precision medicine. About 95-96% of respondents agreed that precision medicine will be effective in treatment and precise diagnosis, and 69.9% reported that they would participate as study subjects. Meanwhile, they expressed concerns regarding educating patients and health professionals in precision medicine and developing research and data sharing infrastructure. Also, they emphasized the importance of developing precision medicine in an equitable way. Despite varying levels of awareness of precision medicine, the health professionals expressed a willingness to engage in precision medicine research, and recommended that health professionals work closely with policymakers to design precision medicine in a way that can be effectively adopted. Health professionals showed had a positive, but cautious, attitude toward precision medicine. The results of this study suggest areas to be addressed before ushering in precision medicine in Korea.

Keyword

Precision medicine; mixed method; awareness; attitude; neoplasms

MeSH Terms

Diagnosis
Focus Groups
Health Occupations*
Humans
Information Dissemination
Korea*
Methods*
Precision Medicine*
Qualitative Research
Surveys and Questionnaires

Reference

1. Collins FS, Varmus H. A new initiative on precision medicine. N Engl J Med. 2015; 372:793–795. PMID: 25635347.

2. Larry Jameson J, Longo DL. Precision medicine—personalized, problematic, and promising. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2015; 70:612–614.

3. Mirnezami R, Nicholson J, Darzi A. Preparing for precision medicine. N Engl J Med. 2012; 366:489–491. PMID: 22256780.

4. Ashley EA. The precision medicine initiative: a new national effort. JAMA. 2015; 313:2119–2120. PMID: 25928209.

5. National Library of Medicine (US). What is the precision medicine initiative? accessed on 2018 November 5. Available at: https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/precisionmedicine/initiative.

6. Keogh B. Personalised medicine strategy: NHS England board. accessed on 2018 November 7. Available at: https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/item5-board-29-09-15.pdf.

7. Lévy Y. Genomic medicine 2025: France in the race for precision medicine. Lancet. 2016; 388:2872. PMID: 27979406.

8. Asano H. Personalized and precision medicine in Japan. Asia Health Policy Program working paper #43. Stanford (CA): Stanford University;2017.

9. Cyranoski D. China embraces precision medicine on a massive scale. Nature. 2016; 529:9–10. PMID: 26738574.

10. The Ministry of Health and Welfare. Promoting personalized medical care and securing future growth engines through the Ministry of Health and Welfare and Precision Medicine. accessed on 2018 November 12. Available at: http://www.mohw.go.kr/react/al/sal0301vw.jsp?PAR_MENU_ID=04&MENU_ID=0403&page=1&CONT_SEQ=333832.

11. Moon S, Jang K, Kim H. Success strategy of precision medicine. KISTEP InI. 2016; 15:14–32.

12. Johnson RB, Onwuegbuzie AJ. Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educ Res. 2004; 33:14–26.

13. Juengst E, McGowan ML, Fishman JR, Settersten RA Jr. From “personalized” to “precision” medicine: the ethical and social implications of rhetorical reform in genomic medicine. Hastings Cent Rep. 2016; 46:21–33. PMID: 27649826.

14. Bonter K, Desjardins C, Currier N, Pun J, Ashbury FD. Personalised medicine in Canada: a survey of adoption and practice in oncology, cardiology and family medicine. BMJ Open. 2011; 1:e000110.

15. Stanek EJ, Sanders CL, Taber KA, Khalid M, Patel A, Verbrugge RR, et al. Adoption of pharmacogenomic testing by US physicians: results of a nationwide survey. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2012; 91:450–458. PMID: 22278335.

16. Mountcastle-Shah E, Holtzman NA. Primary care physicians' perceptions of barriers to genetic testing and their willingness to participate in research. Am J Med Genet. 2000; 94:409–416. PMID: 11050628.

17. Vorderstrasse A, Katsanis SH, Minear MA, Yang N, Rakhra-Burris T, Reeves JW, et al. Perceptions of personalized medicine in an academic health system: educational findings. J Contemp Med Educ. 2015; 3:14–19. PMID: 26236542.

18. Pritchard DE, Moeckel F, Villa MS, Housman LT, McCarty CA, McLeod HL. Strategies for integrating personalized medicine into healthcare practice. Per Med. 2017; 14:141–152. PMID: 29754553.

19. McGrath S, Ghersi D. Building towards precision medicine: empowering medical professionals for the next revolution. BMC Med Genomics. 2016; 9:23. PMID: 27160306.

20. NHS Scotland. Scottish Medicines Consortium. accessed on 2018 November 20. Available at: http://www.scottishmedicines.org.uk/Home.