Pharmacogenetic (PGx) literature has shown beneficial outcomes in safety, efficacy and cost when evidence-based gene-drug decision making is incorporated into clinical practice. PGx programs with successfully implemented clinical services have been published in a variety of settings including academic health centers and community practice. The primary objective was to systematically scope the literature to characterize the current trends, extent, range and nature of clinical PGx programs. Forty articles representing 19 clinical PGx programs were included in analysis. Most programs are in urban, academic institutions. Education, governance and workflow were commonly described while billing/reimbursement and consent were not. This review provides an overview of current PGx models that can be used as a reference for institutions beginning the implementation process.

Background: While pharmacists are well positioned to implement pharmacogenomic testing in healthcare systems, uptake has been limited. Objective: The primary objective of this survey was to determine how post-graduate education and training influences pharmacist’s knowledge and attitudes of pharmacogenomic testing. Methods: Survey questions were developed by the study team, and responses were collected electronically using REDCapTM. The electronic survey was sent to all pharmacists (n=161) within a large, multi-state healthcare system by email. Results: A total of 75 (47%) respondents completed all aspects of the survey. The majority of respondents were female (60%), worked in acute care settings (57%), were full-time employees (80%), and worked in an urban area (85%), with many graduating in or after 2010 (43%). For post-graduate education, 36% of respondents completed a Post-Graduate Year One Residency (PGY-1), and 27% had a board certification. Those that completed a PGY-1 residency were significantly more likely to have received formal training or education on pharmacogenomics than those who had not. They also assessed their own knowledge of pharmacogenomic resources and guidelines higher than those without PGY-1 training. More recent graduates were also significantly more likely to have received formal training or education on pharmacogenomics. Additionally, pharmacists who completed a PGY-1 residency were more likely to respond favorably to pharmacogenomics being offered through pharmacy services. Pharmacists with board certification were more comfortable interpreting results of a pharmacogenomic test than those without board certification. Conclusions: Pharmacists who have completed a PGY-1 residency or received board certification appear more comfortable with interpretation and implementation of pharmacogenomic testing.