Patient Perceptions of Telephone vs. In-Person <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA1/BRCA2</Emphasis> Genetic Counseling

Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer risk has been associated with positive outcomes in high risk women. However, little is known about how patients perceive TC. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus usual care (UC; in-person genetic counseling), we compared high risk women’s perceptions of: (1) overall satisfaction with genetic counseling; (2) convenience; (3) attentiveness during the session; (4) counselor effectiveness in providing support; and (5) counselor ability to recognize emotional responses during the session. Among the 554 participants (TC, N?=?272; UC, N?=?282), delivery mode was not associated with self-reported satisfaction. However, TC participants found counseling significantly more convenient than UC participants (OR?=?4.78, 95 % CI?=?3.32, 6.89) while also perceiving lower levels of support (OR?=?0.56, 95 % CI?=?0.40–0.80) and emotional recognition (OR?=?0.53, 95 % CI?=?0.37–0.76). In exploratory analyses, we found that non-Hispanic white participants reported higher counselor support in UC than in TC (69.4 % vs. 52.8 %; OR?=?3.06, 95 % CI?=?1.39–6.74), while minority women perceived less support in UC vs. TC (58.3 % vs. 38.7 %; OR?=?0.80, 95 % CI?=?0.39–1.65). We discuss potential research and practice implications of these findings which may further improve the effectiveness and utilization of TC.     

Clinician-Stakeholders’ Perspectives on Using Patient Portals to Return Lynch Syndrome Screening Results

Test results for genetic conditions, such as Lynch Syndrome (LS), have traditionally been returned by genetic counselors or other providers who can explain results implications and provide psychosocial support. Returning genetic results through an Electronic Health Record’s patient portal may increase the efficiency of returning results and could activate patient follow-up; however, stakeholder input is necessary to determine acceptability and appropriate implementation for LS. Twenty interviews were conducted with clinicians from six specialties involved in LS screening that represent a range of settings. Data were analyzed using directed content analysis and thematic analysis across content categories. Participants felt that patient portals could supplement personal calls, but the potential sensitive nature of LS screening results indicated the need for caution. Others felt that LS results could be returned through portals if there were clear explanations of the result, reputable additional information available within the portal, urging follow up confirmatory testing, and a referral to a genetics specialist. Patient portals were seen as helpful for prompting patient follow-up and providing resources to notify at-risk family members. There is potential for patient portals to return LS screening and other genetic results, however we raise several issues to resolve before implementation is warranted.     

Aligning Policy to Promote Cascade Genetic Screening for Prevention and Early Diagnosis of Heritable Diseases

Cascade genetic screening is a methodology for identifying and testing close blood relatives of individuals at increased risk for heritable conditions and follows a sequential process, minimizing testing costs and the number of family members who need to be tested. It offers considerable potential for cost savings and increased awareness of heritable conditions within families. CDC-classified Tier 1 genomic applications for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC), Lynch Syndrome (LS), and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) are recommended for clinical use and support the use of cascade genetic screening. Most individuals are unaware of their increased risk for heritable conditions such as HBOC, LS, and FH. Consistent implementation of cascade genetic screening could significantly increase awareness and prevention of heritable conditions. Limitations to effective implementation of cascade genetic screening include: insufficient genetic risk assessment and knowledge by a majority of healthcare providers without genetics credentials; a shortage of genetic specialists, especially in rural areas; a low rate of reimbursement for comprehensive genetic counseling services; and an individual focus on prevention by clinical guidelines and insurance coverage. The family-centric approach of cascade genetic screening improves prevention and early diagnosis of heritable diseases on a population health level. Cascade genetic screening could be better supported and augmented through changes in health policy.     

Clinical and Counseling Experiences of Early Adopters of Whole Exome Sequencing

Currently, there are limited data regarding the practice of genetic counseling for whole exome sequencing (WES). Improved understanding of how genetic counselors and other providers are educating, counseling, and communicating results may identify practice trends, and patient or provider needs. Between April 2013 and December 2014, we surveyed providers who ordered WES testing from GeneDx, a CLIA-certified laboratory. Forty-nine respondents completed the survey; 41 % of participants reported board certification in genetic counseling. Pre-test and post-test counseling was completed in all but one case each. Pre-test counseling lasted less than 1 h for 53 % of cases and 1 to 2 h for 43 %. Topics discussed with all patients included consent for testing, and incidental findings; other topics were variable. In contrast to pre-test counseling, 59 % reported post-test counseling lasting 1 to 2 h and 33 % less than an hour; post-testing counseling was significantly longer in cases with a definitive diagnosis than those without (p?=?0.0129). The survey findings indicate some variability regarding the amount of time spent on counseling and the topics discussed during pre-test counseling. Additional exploration, patient and provider educational resources, and potentially more specific guidelines regarding counseling for WES may be warranted.     

Focusing on Patient Needs and Preferences May Improve Genetic Counseling for Colorectal Cancer

During cancer genetic counseling, different items which counselors consider important are discussed. However, relatively little empirical evidence exists regarding the needs and preferences of counselees. In this study needs and preferences were assessed from counselees with a personal and/or family history of colorectal cancer (CRC), who were referred for genetic counseling regarding CRC. They received a slightly modified version of the QUOTE-GENE^ca questionnaire prior to their first visit to the Hereditary Cancer Clinic. Response rate was 60 % (48/80 participants). Counselees rated the importance of 45 items assessing their needs and preferences regarding the content and process of genetic counseling. Participants rated the items regarding discussion of information about their familial CRC risk (100 %) and preventive options (98 %) as important or very important. Fewer participants rated items concerning general information on genetics as important. Sensitive communication during counseling was considered very important by a large percentage of counselees. Generally, no major differences were seen between participants in relation to individual characteristics. Our data suggest that focusing on familial CRC risk and surveillance options, in combination with sensitive communication may lead to better satisfaction with genetic counseling.     

Evaluation of the Informational Content,Readability and Comprehensibility of Online Health Information on Monogenic Diabetes

The purpose of this study was to assess the informational content, readability, suitability and comprehensibility of websites offering educational information about monogenic diabetes available to patients. The top 20 results from 15 queries in four search engines were screened. Content analysis was performed by two independent coders. Readability was determined using Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL) and Simplified Measure of Goobledygook (SMOG). The Comprehensibility Assessment of Materials (SAM + CAM) scale was utilized to evaluate website suitability and comprehensibility. Only 2% (N = 29) of 1200 screened websites met inclusion criteria. Content analysis showed that 16 websites presented information on at least the most common forms of MODY (1, 2 and 3), four addressed the utility of genetic counseling, and none included support resources for patients. All websites exceeded the consensus readability level (6th grade) as assessed by FKGL (10.1 grade) and SMOG (12.8 ± 1.5 grades). Although the majority (N = 20) of websites had an overall “adequate” to “superior” quality score (SAM + CAM score > = 40%), more than one-third scored “not suitable” in categories of content, literacy demand, graphics, and learning motivation. The online educational resources for monogenic diabetes have a high readability level and require improvement in ease of use and comprehensibility for patients with diabetes.     

Lifestyle Risk Factors Among People Who Have Had Cancer Genetic Testing

Hereditary cancer genetic counseling often focuses on medically intensive risk-reduction strategies, like imaging and risk-reducing surgeries. Lifestyle factors also influence cancer risk, but health behavior counseling is not common in genetic counseling. Information about typical lifestyle risk factors among patients seeking hereditary cancer risk is sparse. The current study describes cancer risk-relevant lifestyle factors for people who have had cancer genetic testing. Data came from the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 4) collected in 2013. Analytic variables represented American Cancer Society nutrition and physical activity guidelines. Lifestyle factors were assessed for people who had undergone testing for BRCA1, BRCA2, or Lynch Syndrome genes. Among 3016 HINTS respondents, 135 had cancer genetic testing. Of these, 58 % were overweight or obese. Eighteen percent reported no moderate-intensity physical activity. Average sedentary screen-time was 3.4 h (SE = 0.472) daily. Sixty-three percent drank non-diet soda, and 23 % of these people drank soda every day. Between 18 and 36 % consumed less than 2 ½ cups fruits/vegetables daily. Twenty-four percent were current smokers. Lifestyle risk factors were not different between people who had genetic testing and those who had not. In conclusion, most people who had genetic testing for cancer susceptibility have at least one modifiable risk factor. Genetic counselors have opportunities to impact a counselee’s cancer risk not only through risk-tailored medical procedures, but also through lifestyle modification recommendations. Results of the current study may foster a broader discussion of genetic counselors’ roles in healthy lifestyle education.     

Changes in Specialists’ Perspectives on Cancer Genetic Testing,Prophylactic Surgery and Insurance Discrimination: Then and Now

We surveyed cancer genetics specialists in 1998 to learn what they would do if at 50 % risk to carry a BRCA or Lynch syndrome mutation. We chose to repeat our study 14 years later, to examine how perspectives have changed with the extensive data now available. In July 2012 we surveyed the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) Cancer Special Interest Group via an internet based survey. We found statistically significant increases in the percentage of specialists who: would undergo BRCA testing (p?=?0.0006), opt for prophylactic bilateral mastectomy (p =0.0001), opt for prophylactic removal of their uterus and ovaries for Lynch syndrome (p =0.0057 and P?=?0.0090, respectively), and bill testing to insurance (p >0.0001). There were also statistically significant decreases in the percentage of participants who would have their colon removed for Lynch syndrome (p?=?0.0002) and use an alias when pursuing testing (p?>?0.0001). Over the past 14 years there has been a major change in perspective amongst cancer genetic specialists regarding genetic testing, prophylactic surgery and insurance discrimination.     

Effects of a Genetic Counseling Model on Mothers of Children with Down Syndrome: A Brazilian Pilot Study

Down syndrome occurs in approximately 1:600 live births. Genetic counseling is indicated for these families and may be beneficial for adaptation to the challenges that accompany by this diagnosis. Although the basic counseling goals are similar, there are many models of genetic counseling practiced around the world. The aim of this article is to report the results of a pilot study that evaluated the level of satisfaction with a model of service delivery of genetic counseling practiced in Brazil, the knowledge assimilated about Down syndrome and whether this process resulted in a feeling of well-being and psychological support. Thirty mothers of under 6-month-old children with Down syndrome were interviewed after having two sessions of genetic counseling in a public healthcare service within a period of 30 days. A semi-structured questionnaire was developed by the researchers to collect identification, socioeconomic and demographic data and to assess the client’s satisfaction with the model of genetic counseling. Data were collected using both open and closed questions. The reported level of satisfaction was high. The knowledge assimilated about Down syndrome after only two sessions was considered technically vague by raters in 44 % of cases. Most mothers (96.7 %) reported that genetic counseling was beneficial and provided psychological support. The model was considered satisfactory, but further research is needed to identify ways to improve knowledge retention by this population. These results highlight the utility of referring families for genetic counseling when there is a suspicion of a diagnosis of Down syndrome.     

Outcomes of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Genomic Counseling for Patients Receiving Personalized and Actionable Complex Disease Reports

There has been very limited study of patients with chronic disease receiving potentially actionable genomic based results or the utilization of genetic counselors in the online result delivery process. We conducted a randomized controlled trial on 199 patients with chronic disease each receiving eight personalized and actionable complex disease reports online. Primary study aims were to assess the impact of in-person genomic counseling on 1) causal attribution of disease risk, 2) personal awareness of disease risk, and 3) perceived risk of developing a particular disease. Of 98 intervention arm participants (mean age = 57.8; 39% female) randomized for in-person genomic counseling, 76 (78%) were seen. In contrast, control arm participants (n = 101; mean age = 58.5; 54% female) were initially not offered genomic counseling as part of the study protocol but were able to access in-person genomic counseling, if they requested it, 3-months post viewing of at least one test report and post-completion of the study-specific follow-up survey. A total of 64 intervention arm and 59 control arm participants completed follow-up survey measures. We found that participants receiving in-person genomic counseling had enhanced objective understanding of the genetic variant risk contribution for multiple complex diseases. Genomic counseling was associated with lowered participant causal beliefs in genetic influence across all eight diseases, compared to control participants. Our findings also illustrate that for the majority of diseases under study, intervention arm participants believed they knew their genetic risk status better than control arm subjects. Disease risk was modified for the majority during genomic counseling, due to the assessment of more comprehensive family history. In conclusion, for patients receiving personalized and actionable genomic results through a web portal, genomic counseling enhanced their objective understanding of the genetic variant risk contribution to multiple common diseases. These results support the development of additional genomic counseling interventions to ensure a high level of patient comprehension and improve patient-centered health outcomes.     

Impact of Genomic Counseling on Informed Decision-Making among ostensibly Healthy Individuals Seeking Personal Genome Sequencing: the HealthSeq Project

Personal genome sequencing is increasingly utilized by healthy individuals for predispositional screening and other applications. However, little is known about the impact of ‘genomic counseling’ on informed decision-making in this context. Our primary aim was to compare measures of participants’ informed decision-making before and after genomic counseling in the HealthSeq project, a longitudinal cohort study of individuals receiving personal results from whole genome sequencing (WGS). Our secondary aims were to assess the impact of the counseling on WGS knowledge and concerns, and to explore participants’ satisfaction with the counseling. Questionnaires were administered to participants (n = 35) before and after their pre-test genomic counseling appointment. Informed decision-making was measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and the Satisfaction with Decision Scale (SDS). DCS scores decreased after genomic counseling (mean: 11.34 before vs. 5.94 after; z = ?4.34, p < 0.001, r = 0.52), and SDS scores increased (mean: 27.91 vs. 29.06 respectively; z = 2.91, p = 0.004, r = 0.35). Satisfaction with counseling was high (mean (SD) = 26.91 (2.68), on a scale where 6 = low and 30 = high satisfaction). HealthSeq participants felt that their decision regarding receiving personal results from WGS was more informed after genomic counseling. Further research comparing the impact of different genomic counseling models is needed.     

A Comparison of Telephone Genetic Counseling and In-Person Genetic Counseling from the Genetic Counselor’s Perspective

Growing demand for and limited geographic access to genetic counseling services is increasing the need for alternative service delivery models (SDM) like telephone genetic counseling (TGC). Little research has been done on genetic counselors’ perspectives of the practice of TGC. We created an anonymous online survey to assess whether telephone genetic counselors believed the tasks identified in the ABGC (American Board of Genetic Counseling) Practice Analysis were performed similarly or differently in TGC compared to in person genetic counseling (IPGC). If there were differences noted, we sought to determine the nature of the differences and if additional training might be needed to address them. Eighty eight genetic counselors with experience in TGC completed some or all of the survey. Respondents identified differences in 13 (14.8 %) of the 88 tasks studied. The tasks identified as most different in TGC were: “establishing rapport through verbal and nonverbal interactions” (60.2 %; 50/83 respondents identified the task as different), “recognizing factors affecting the counseling interaction” (47.8 %; 32/67), “assessing client/family emotions, support, etc.” (40.1 %; 27/66) and “educating clients about basic genetic concepts” (35.6 %; 26/73). A slight majority (53.8 %; 35/65) felt additional training was needed to communicate information without visual aids and more effectively perform psychosocial assessments. In summary, although a majority of genetic counseling tasks are performed similarly between TGC and IPGC, TGC counselors recognize that specific training in the TGC model may be needed to address the key differences.     

Client Perceptions of the Impact of Genetic Counseling: An Exploratory Study

Twenty-eight former genetic counseling clients seen at a major Midwestern university were recruited to be interviewed about their genetic counseling experiences, including most and least helpful aspects, what they learned, how this information impacted their decision-making, and their perceptions of their genetic counselors' behaviors. Responses were inductively analyzed, and several themes were identified, including: Clients sought genetic counseling to obtain genetic-medical information; a majority accurately recalled this information; genetic counseling influenced decisions for about 50% of the sample; decision-making was affected by several extra-session factors; a majority experienced distress during the session; most perceived genetic counselor responses as nondirective and liked this approach; counselor behaviors regarded as directive involved discussion of pregnancy termination; participants disagreed about the need for and provision of genetic counselor support; most regarded the session as helpful and stated that they would seek genetic counseling again. Suggestions for addressing these issues in practice and research are given.     

Participation in Breast Cancer Genetic Counseling: The Influence of Educational Level, Ethnic Background, and Risk Perception

Genetic counseling has been suggested as a means of providing information and support to women with a family history of breast cancer. Yet women who undergo cancer genetic counseling in the United States generally consist of only a subset of those at risk, namely well-educated, upper-middle class, European American and Jewish women. We report outcomes from a study that provided a unique opportunity to determine whether women of African American, European American, Native American, or Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry have varying interest in having cancer genetic counseling. The study offered a genetic counseling session to 97 women with a family history of breast cancer who were participating in a larger interview study designed to assess attitudes toward genetic testing for breast cancer. The study offered genetic counseling free of charge to all study participants with a family history of breast cancer, removing the potential barriers of cost, the need for a physician referral, and lack of awareness of genetic counseling. Fifty women out of the 97 women offered genetic counseling (52%) accepted the offer by completing a session. Those who accepted genetic counseling had a higher educational level, a higher perceived risk of breast cancer, and were more likely to expect a positive BRCA1 or BRCA2 genetic test if they were to undergo genetic testing. When controlling for education level, there was no correlation between the participants' ethnic background and acceptance of a genetic counseling session. Outreach efforts to minority populations may increase awareness of the availability of genetic counseling and may facilitate participation by such populations.     

Patient Perspectives on Intimate Partner Violence Discussion during Genetic Counseling Sessions

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a major health concern in the United States (ACOG 2013). The World Health Organization (WHO) describes IPV as any physical, sexual, psychological harm by a current or former intimate partner (WHO 2016). Due to the psychosocial depth and nature of discussions within genetic counseling sessions, patients may disclose and/or discuss IPV as it relates to sexual well-being, reproductive and overall health. This study aims to assess the role for IPV screening, counseling and intervention in genetic counseling practice by investigating the incidence, experiences and attitudes about IPV among genetic counseling patients. Patients receiving genetic counseling at an urban metropolitan hospital were anonymously surveyed about experiences and perspectives on IPV as a topic of discussion during genetic counseling sessions. Among 60 eligible patients, 50 completed the survey (49 females, 1 male, of which, 5 identified as LGBT) ages 20 to 66. The incidence of IPV in this group was 16.0 % (n = 8). Majority of participants had never been asked about IPV by a healthcare provider (n = 32; 64.0%), would have felt comfortable answering questions about IPV by their healthcare provider (n = 34; 68.0%), and would have felt comfortable answering questions about IPV by their genetic counselor (n = 39; 78.0%). Perspectives from all participants, notably those with IPV history, provided insights to the role of genetic counselors in areas for IPV screening and counseling training.     

High Satisfaction and Low Distress in Breast Cancer Patients One Year after <Emphasis Type="Italic">BRCA</Emphasis>-Mutation Testing without Prior Face-to-Face Genetic Counseling

According to standard practice following referral to clinical genetics, most high risk breast cancer (BC) patients in many countries receive face-to-face genetic counseling prior to BRCA-mutation testing (DNA-intake). We evaluated a novel format by prospective study: replacing the intake consultation with telephone, written and digital information sent home. Face-to-face counseling then followed BRCA-mutation testing (DNA-direct). One year after BRCA-result disclosure, 108 participants returned long-term follow-up questionnaires, of whom 59 (55 %) had previously chosen DNA-direct (intervention) versus DNA-intake (standard practice i.e., control: 45 %). Questionnaires assessed satisfaction and psychological distress. All participants were satisfied and 85 % of DNA-direct participants would choose this procedure again; 10 % would prefer DNA-intake and 5 % were undecided. In repeated measurements ANOVA, general distress (GHQ-12, p?=?0.01) and BC-specific distress (IES-bc, p?=?0.03) were lower in DNA-direct than DNA-intake at all time measurements. Heredity-specific distress (IES-her) did not differ significantly between groups. Multivariate regression analyses showed that choice of procedure did not significantly contribute to either general or heredity-specific distress. BC-specific distress (after BC diagnosis) did contribute to both general and heredity-specific distress. This suggests that higher distress scores reflected BC experience, rather than the type of genetic diagnostic procedure. In conclusion, the large majority of BC patients that used DNA-direct reported high satisfaction without increased distress both in the short term, and 1 year after conclusion of genetic testing.     

Acceptability of Telemedicine and Other Cancer Genetic Counseling Models of Service Delivery in Geographically Remote Settings

This work examined acceptability of cancer genetic counseling models of service delivery among Maine residents at risk for hereditary cancer susceptibility disorders. Pre-counseling, participants ranked characteristics reflecting models of care from most to least important including: mode-of-communication (in-person versus telegenetics), provider level of training (genetic specialty versus some training/experience), delivery format (one-on-one versus group counseling), and location (local versus tertiary service requiring travel). Associations between models of care characteristic rankings and patient characteristics, including rural residence, perceived cancer risk, and perceived risk for a hereditary cancer risk susceptibility disorder were examined. A total of 149/300 (49.7 % response rate) individuals from 11/16 Maine counties responded; 30.8 % were from rural counties; 92.2 % indicated that an important/the most important model of care characteristic is provider professional qualifications. Among other characteristics, 65.1 % ranked one-on-one counseling as important/the most important. In-person and local counseling were ranked the two least important characteristics (51.8 % and 52.1 % important/the most important, respectively). Responses did not vary by patient characteristics with the exception of greater acceptance of group counseling among those at perceived high personal cancer risk. Cancer telegenetic services hold promise for access to expert providers in a one-on-one format for rurally remote clients.     

Experience of Norwegian Female BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation-Carrying Participants in Educational Support Groups: a Qualitative Study

Women identified as BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are advised to manage their cancer risk through intensive screening programs and/or by undergoing risk-reducing surgery. The aim of this study was to explore and describe the experiences of female BRCA1/2 mutation carriers living with cancer risk and their experiences with participation in educational support groups (ESG). This qualitative study enrolled 17 (10 + 7) ESG participants in two different ESGs. The focus group interviews were performed immediately prior to and following two ESGs. The data were analyzed using John Knodel’s (1993) practical approach. Three main themes were identified; the women’s expectation and experience with ESG, the feeling of loneliness and isolation, and the feelings of living with “something else.” In this paper we have focused on one of the main themes- the women’s expectation and experience with ESG. This main theme presents four subthemes: the women’s need for unambiguous, clear and unified information from health professionals, the need for social support, the important role of the patient representative, and increased knowledge potentially raising concern. Participation in an ESG for women with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations can provide relevant information and support in the decision-making process related to risk-reducing surgery.