Journal of Community Genetics

, Volume 9, Issue 3, pp 293–303 | Cite as

Experience of Asian males communicating cardiac genetic risk within the family

  • Sylvia Kam
  • Yasmin Bylstra
  • Laura Forrest
  • Ivan Macciocca
  • Roger Foo
Original Article


The genetic nature of an inherited cardiac condition (ICC) places first- and second-degree relatives at risk of cardiac complications and sudden death, even in the absence of symptoms. Communication of cardiac genetic risk information allows at-risk relatives to clarify, manage, and potentially prevent ICC-associated risks through cardiac screening. Literature regarding family communication of genetic risk information are predominantly based on Western populations, with limited insight into the Asian experience. This qualitative exploratory study provides a male perspective into the communication of ICC risks within families in Singapore. Eight male participants with clinically diagnosed cardiomyopathy, who had all received genetic counseling, were recruited. A phenomenological perspective was used to identify emergent themes from semi-structured interviews. In this study, most participants recalled their healthcare professional’s emphasis on family communication. Notably, participants revealed that at-risk relatives were not accessing screening, and many described family members as currently asymptomatic and “healthy.” These findings coincide with documented Asian beliefs regarding perceptions of health, which have important implications for the provision of genetic counseling support within Asian communities, especially in facilitating family communication such that at-risk relatives are informed about their ICC risks and available management options.


Genetic counseling Inherited cardiac conditions Family communication Genetic risk information Singapore Asia 


Funding information

This study was completed in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Genetic Counselling, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, and was supported by the Victorian Government’s Operational Infrastructure Support Program.

Sylvia Kam was supported by POLARIS @ SingHealth to undertake the Master of Genetic Counselling. POLARIS (Personalised OMIC Lattice for Advanced Research and Improving Stratification) is a collaboration between the Genome Institute of Singapore (GIS) at the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) and Singapore Health Services (SingHealth).

This work was also in part supported by a grant from the National Medical Research Council and a National University Health System (NUHS) Seed Fund that went towards setting up the ICC clinic at the National University Heart Centre Singapore (NUHCS).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human participants and/or animals

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

12687_2017_352_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (50 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 50kb)


  1. Allford A, Qureshi N, Barwell J, Lewis C, Kai J (2014) What hinders minority ethnic access to cancer genetics services and what may help? Eur J Hum Genet 22(7):866–874. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Batte B, Sheldon JP, Arscott P, Huismann DJ, Salberg L, Day SM, Yashar BM (2014) Family communication in a population at risk for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. J Genet Couns 24:336–348CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Braun V, Clarke V (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 3(2):77–101. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Charron P, Arad M, Arbustini E, Basso C, Bilinska Z, Elliott P, Helio T, Keren A, McKenna WJ, Monserrat L, Pankuweit S, Perrot A, Rapezzi C, Ristic A, Seggewiss H, van Langen I, Tavazzi L, European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Myocardial and Pericardial Diseases (2010) Genetic counselling and testing in cardiomyopathies: a position statement of the European society of cardiology working group on myocardial and pericardial diseases. Eur Heart J 31(22):2715–2726. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen W-T (2009) Predictors of breast examination practices of Chinese immigrants. Cancer Nurs 32(1):64–72. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Chieng WS, Chan N, Lee SC (2011) Non-directive genetic counselling—respect for autonomy or unprofessional practice? Ann Acad Med Singap 40(1):36–42PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Chin T-M, Tan S-H, Lim S-E, Lau P, Yong W-P, Wong S-W, Lee S-C (2005) Acceptance, motivators, and barriers in attending breast cancer genetic counseling in Asians. Cancer Detect Prev 29(5):412–418. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Cirino AL, Ho CY (2014) Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy overview. University of Washington, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  9. Claramita M, Nugraheni MF, van Dalen J, van der Vleuten C (2013) Doctor-patient communication in Southeast Asia: a different culture? Adv Health Sci Educ 18:15–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cowan J, Morales A, Dagua J, Hershberger RE (2008) Genetic testing and genetic counseling in cardiovascular genetic medicine: overview and preliminary recommendations. Congest Heart Fail 14(2):97–105. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. D’Agincourt-Canning L (2001) Experiences of genetic risk: disclosure and the gendering of responsibility. Bioethics 15(3):231–247. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Elliott PM, Lambiase PD, Kumar D (2011) Inherited cardiac disease. Oxford University Press, New York. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Forbes Shepherd R, Browne TK, Warwick L (2017) A relational approach to genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. J Genet Couns 26(2):283–299. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Forrest LE, Delatycki MB, Skene L, Aitken MA (2007) Communicating genetic information in families—a review of guidelines and position papers. Eur J Hum Genet 15(6):612–618. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Gaff CL, Collins V, Symes T, Halliday J (2005) Facilitating family communication about predictive genetic testing: probands’ perceptions. J Genet Couns 14(2):133–140. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gaff CL, Clarke AJ, Atkinson P, Sivell S, Elwyn G, Iredale R, Thornton H, Dundon J, Shaw C, Edwards A (2007) Process and outcome in communication of genetic information within families: a systematic review. Eur J Hum Genet 15(10):999–1011. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Galea S, Tracy M (2007) Participation rates in epidemiologic studies. Ann Epidemiol 17(9):643–653. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Gill P, Stewart K, Treasure E, Chadwick B (2008) Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. Br Dent J 204(6):291–295. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Gupta AF (1992) The pragmatic particles of Singapore colloquial English. J Pragmat 18(1):31–57. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hershberger RE, Morales A (2015) Dilated cardiomyopathy overview. University of Washington, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  21. Hodgson J, Gaff C (2013) Enhancing family communication about genetics: ethical and professional dilemmas. J Genet Couns 22(1):16–21. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Holloway I, Todres L (2003) The status of method: flexibility, consistency and coherence. Qual Res 3(3):345–357. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Honein-AbouHaidar GN et al (2016) Systematic review and meta-study synthesis of qualitative studies evaluating facilitators and barriers to participation in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiol Prev Biomarkers 25:907–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Juwita S, Norwati D, Harmy M, T Alina T, Siti Hawa A (2013) Barriers to cardiovascular screening among Malay women in East Coast Malaysia. Int J Collab Res Intern Med Public Health 5:67–78Google Scholar
  25. Keenan KF, Simpson SA, Wilson BJ, Van Teijlingen ER, McKee L, Haites N, Matthews E (2005) ‘It's their blood not mine’: who’s responsible for (not) telling relatives about genetic risk? Health, Risk Soc 7(3):209–226. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kressin NR, Manze M, Russell SL, Katz RV, Claudio C, Green BL, Wang MQ (2010) Self-reported willingness to have cancer screening and the effects of sociodemographic factors. J Natl Med Assoc 102(3):219–227. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Kwan-Terry A (1978) The meaning and the source of the “la” and the “what” particles in Singapore English. RELC J 9(2):22–36. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kwok C, Sullivan G (2006) Influence of traditional Chinese beliefs on cancer screening behaviour among Chinese-Australian women. J Adv Nurs 54(6):691–699. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Liamputtong P (2013) Qualitative research methods, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, South MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  30. Lim M-K (2012) Values and health care: the Confucian dimension in health care reform. J Med Philos 37(6):545–555. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Markanday S, Brennan SL, Gould H, Pasco JA (2013) Sex-differences in reasons for non-participation at recruitment: Geelong Osteoporosis Study. BMC Res Notes 6(1):104–110. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. Martins T, Hamilton W (2016) The influence of ethnicity on diagnosis of cancer. Fam Pract 33(4):325–326. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. McCarthy Veach P, Bartels DM, LeRoy B (2003) Facilitating the genetic counseling process: a practice manual. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Morris B (2014) The impact of culture & ethnicity on the counseling process: perspectives of genetic counselors from minority ethnic groups. University of South Carolina, ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  35. Predham S, Hathaway J, Hulait G, Arbour L, Lehman A (2017) Patient recall, interpretation, and perspective of an inconclusive long QT syndrome genetic test result. J Genet Couns 26(1):150–158. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Richards M (1996) Families, kinship and genetics. In: Marteau T, Richards M (eds) The troubled helix: social and psychological implications of the new human genetics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 249–273. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Seymour KC, Addington-Hall J, Lucassen AM, Foster CL (2010) What facilitates or impedes family communication following genetic testing for cancer risk? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of primary qualitative research. J Genet Couns 19(4):330–342. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Singapore Department of Statistics (2016) Latest key indicators.
  39. Stol YH, Asscher EC, Schermer MH (2015) Reasons to participate or not to participate in cardiovascular health checks: a review of the literature. Public Health Ethics 9:301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. The American Society of Human Genetics Social Issues Subcommittee on Familial Disclosure (1998) Professional disclosure of familial genetic information. Am J Hum Genet 62:474–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. van der Roest WP, Pennings JM, Bakker M, van den Berg MP, van Tintelen JP (2009) Family letters are an effective way to inform relatives about inherited cardiac disease. Am J Med Genet A 149:357–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vavolizza RD et al (2014) Disclosing genetic information to family members about inherited cardiac arrhythmias: an obligation or a choice? J Genet Couns 24:608–615CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Vrinten C, Wardle J, Marlow LA (2016) Cancer fear and fatalism among ethnic minority women in the United Kingdom. Br J Cancer 114(5):597–604. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Vrinten C, McGregor LM, Heinrich M, Wagner C, Waller J, Wardle J, Black GB (2017) What do people fear about cancer? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of cancer fears in the general population. Psycho-Oncology 26(8):1070–1079. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Wang J (2014) Singaporean women’s perceptions and barriers to breast and cervical cancer screening. Duke University, DurhamGoogle Scholar
  46. Whyte S, Green A, McAllister M, Shipman H (2016) Family communication in inherited cardiovascular conditions in Ireland. J Genet Couns 25(6):1317–1326. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Wiley KA, Demo EM, Walker P, Shuler CO (2016) Exploring the discussion of risk of sudden cardiac death. Pediatr Cardiol 37(2):262–270. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilson BJ, Forrest K, van Teijlingen ER, McKee L, Haites N, Matthews E, Simpson SA (2004) Family communication about genetic risk: the little that is known. Public Health Genomics 7(1):15–24. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wiseman M, Dancyger C, Michie S (2010) Communicating genetic risk information within families: a review. Familial Cancer 9(4):691–703. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Wong L, Wong Y, Low W, Khoo E, Shuib R (2009) Knowledge and awareness of cervical cancer and screening among Malaysian women who have never had a Pap smear: a qualitative study. Singap Med J 50:49–53Google Scholar
  51. Wu T-Y, West B, Chen Y-W, Hergert C (2006) Health beliefs and practices related to breast cancer screening in Filipino, Chinese and Asian-Indian women. Cancer Detect Prev 30:58–66CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.POLARIS @ SingHealth, Singapore Health ServicesSingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.Department of PaediatricsThe University of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia
  3. 3.SingHealth Duke-NUS Institute of Precision MedicineSingaporeSingapore
  4. 4.Inherited Cardiac Conditions ClinicNational University Heart Centre SingaporeSingaporeSingapore
  5. 5.Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer CentreMelbourneAustralia
  6. 6.Victorian Clinical Genetics ServicesMurdoch Childrens Research InstituteParkvilleAustralia
  7. 7.Cardiovascular Research InstituteNational University Health SystemSingaporeSingapore
  8. 8.Department of CardiologyNational University Heart Centre SingaporeSingaporeSingapore
  9. 9.Centre for Translational Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of MedicineNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations