{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02131782945736434, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010174418604651164, 'mean_word_length': 4.9855072463768115, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The family history in family practice: a questionnaire study.

OBJECTIVES
Our aims were to investigate family medical history taking in general practice, and to evaluate the value attached to the family medical history as an aid to decision making in general practice.


METHOD
A postal questionnaire survey was conducted among all 291 GPs working within the Calderdale and Kirklees Health Authority area. Each questionnaire was followed by a reminder. The main outcome measures were answers to questions on routine and opportunistic family history taking and a question about transmitting knowledge about genetic risk to other members of the family. Questions were also posed about the value attached to the family medical history as an aid to decision making.


RESULTS
A total of 193 GPs returned the questionnaire (response rate 66.3%). On registration, 94.3% of GPs indicated that enquiries were made about a family history of coronary heart disease. Breast and colorectal cancer were specifically asked about by 48.4% and 30.7% of GPs, respectively. One-fifth of respondents indicated that they asked a general question about family medical history. A little over one-quarter of respondents indicated that they made opportunistic enquiries about the family history or suggested that the patient should inform other members of the family about possible risks. In the scenarios highlighted in this study, the majority of respondents felt that the family medical history had value as an aid to decision making. This was particularly the case for checking a patient's cholesterol (92.1%) and for initiating referrals in younger patients with possible cancer-related symptoms (three-quarters of respondents).


CONCLUSION
GPs value the family medical history as an aid to decision making. Unfortunately, apart from enquiries about coronary heart disease, routine or opportunistic family history taking is not occurring in practice. Mechanisms need to be sought to extract information from the family medical history so that it can be more effectively used by GPs.