Abstract
The field of pharmacogenetics (PGx) is experiencing significant growth, with increasing evidence to support its application in psychiatric care, suggesting its potential to personalise treatment plans, optimise medication efficacy, and reduce adverse drug reactions. However, the perceived utility and practicability of PGx for psychiatric treatment in youth remains underexplored. This study investigated youth-perceived barriers and attitudes towards the implementation of PGx testing to guide antidepressant treatment in primary care. Semi-structured focus groups and interviews were conducted with 17 participants aged between 18 to 24 years. These sessions were recorded and transcribed before thematic analysis was used to identify collective themes. Three key themes were identified, including attitudes towards the medication prescription process, concerns and attitudes towards PGx testing, and perceived barriers to its clinical implementation. Although PGx testing was positively perceived by most participants, all participants shared concerns about PGx testing. Participants voiced concerns about the financial impact of PGx testing, the potential for treatment delays, and the accuracy of PGx testing in guiding antidepressant treatment. Additionally, participants noted that the low awareness and willingness of general practitioners to incorporate PGx testing into routine practice could hinder successful clinical implementation. Prior to the implementation of PGx testing into Australian primary practices, it is essential to acknowledge patient perspectives and ensure that clinical practices remain patient-focused. This study highlights important considerations for integrating PGx testing into antidepressant pharmacotherapy and emphasizes the need for future research to address and mitigate youth-perceived barriers.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The authors declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. BR was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP), and a Perron Institute Byron Kakulas Prestige scholarship. The funders had no role in the preparation of the review and the decision to publish.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Human Research Ethics Committees of both the Government of Western Australia, Department of Health (RGS0000005473) and the University of Western Australia (2023/ET000209) gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors on a case-by-case basis.
