1
|
Cragun DL, Hunt PP, Dean M, Zierhut H, Kaphingst K, Resnicow K. Creation and beta testing of a "choose your own adventure" digital simulation to reinforce motivational interviewing skills in genetic counseling. J Genet Couns 2024; 33:15-27. [PMID: 37950577 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1833] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2022] [Revised: 10/09/2023] [Accepted: 10/20/2023] [Indexed: 11/12/2023]
Abstract
Standardized patients and/or role-playing are commonly used for practicing genetic counseling (GC) skills. Use of digital simulation, incorporating gamification elements, would require fewer resources to sustain than standardized patients. This manuscript reports steps taken and the lessons learned from creating a digital "Choose your own adventure" simulation in which students select preferred dialog for a genetic counselor who is seeing an adult patient to discuss genetic testing for the known pathogenic variant that caused familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) in their father. The case has three endings, one of which is attained by selecting options that are mostly consistent with motivational interviewing counseling techniques. We conducted a preliminary evaluation of our beta version among nine GC students and one educator using a survey to assess acceptability and appropriateness as well as to elicit open-ended feedback. All participants agreed or strongly agreed with statements indicating the case was acceptable, appropriate, and fun. Users particularly appreciated the immediate feedback given throughout the case simulation. Many users wanted more options to select from and listed various other recommendations, including several which would require substantial resources to implement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Deborah L Cragun
- College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | | | - Marleah Dean
- Department of Communication, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA
- Health Outcomes and Behavior Program, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Heather Zierhut
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Kimberly Kaphingst
- Department of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Kenneth Resnicow
- School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
- Rogel Cancer Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Jones LK, Calvo EM, Campbell-Salome G, Walters NL, Brangan A, Rodriguez G, Ahmed CD, Morgan KM, Gidding SS, Williams MS, Brownson RC, Seaton TL, Goldberg AC, McGowan MP, Rahm AK, Sturm AC. Designing implementation strategies to improve identification, cascade testing, and management of families with familial hypercholesterolemia: An intervention mapping approach. FRONTIERS IN HEALTH SERVICES 2023; 3:1104311. [PMID: 37188259 PMCID: PMC10175779 DOI: 10.3389/frhs.2023.1104311] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/21/2022] [Accepted: 04/06/2023] [Indexed: 05/17/2023]
Abstract
Introduction Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a common inherited cholesterol disorder that, without early intervention, leads to premature cardiovascular disease. Multilevel strategies that target all components of FH care including identification, cascade testing, and management are needed to address gaps that exist in FH care. We utilized intervention mapping, a systematic implementation science approach, to identify and match strategies to existing barriers and develop programs to improve FH care. Methods Data were collected utilizing two methods: a scoping review of published literature, related to any component of FH care, and a parallel mixed method study using interviews and surveys. The scientific literature was searched using key words including "barriers" or "facilitators" and "familial hypercholesterolemia" from inception to December 1, 2021. The parallel mixed method study recruited individuals and families with FH to participate in either dyadic interviews (N = 11 dyads/22 individuals) or online surveys (N = 98 respondents). Data generated from the scoping review, dyadic interviews, and online surveys were used in the 6-step intervention mapping process. Steps 1-3 included a needs assessment, development of program outcomes and creation of evidence-based implementation strategies. Steps 4-6 included program development, implementation, and evaluation of implementation strategies. Results In steps 1-3, a needs assessment found barriers to FH care included underdiagnosis of the condition which led to suboptimal management due to a myriad of determinants including knowledge gaps, negative attitudes, and risk misperceptions by individuals with FH and clinicians. Literature review highlighted barriers to FH care at the health system level, notably the relative lack of genetic testing resources and infrastructure needed to support FH diagnosis and treatment. Examples of strategies to overcome identified barriers included development of multidisciplinary care teams and educational programs. In steps 4-6, an NHLBI-funded study, the Collaborative Approach to Reach Everyone with FH (CARE-FH), deployed strategies that focused on improving identification of FH in primary care settings. The CARE-FH study is used as an example to describe program development, implementation, and evaluation techniques of implementation strategies. Conclusion The development and deployment of evidence-based implementation strategies that address barriers to FH care are important next steps to improve identification, cascade testing, and management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laney K. Jones
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
- Heart and Vascular Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
| | - Evan M. Calvo
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
- Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Geisinger College of Health Sciences, Geisinger, Scranton, PA, United States
| | - Gemme Campbell-Salome
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
| | - Nicole L. Walters
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
| | - Andrew Brangan
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
| | - Gabriela Rodriguez
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
- Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine, Geisinger College of Health Sciences, Geisinger, Scranton, PA, United States
| | | | - Kelly M. Morgan
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
| | - Samuel S. Gidding
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
| | - Marc S. Williams
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
| | - Ross C. Brownson
- Prevention Research Center in St. Louis, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States
- Department of Surgery (Division of Public Health Sciences), Alvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Terry L. Seaton
- University of Health Sciences and Pharmacy in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | - Anne C. Goldberg
- Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Lipid Research, John T. Milliken Department of Internal Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States
| | | | - Alanna K. Rahm
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
| | - Amy C. Sturm
- Department of Genomic Health, Research Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
- Heart and Vascular Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, United States
- 23andMe, Sunnyvale, CA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Gerido LH, Griggs JJ, Resnicow K, Kidwell KM, Delacroix E, Austin S, Hanson EN, Bacon E, Koeppe E, Goodall S, Demerath M, Rizzo EA, Weiner S, Hawley ST, Uhlmann WR, Roberts JS, Stoffel EM. The Michigan Genetic Hereditary Testing (MiGHT) study's innovative approaches to promote uptake of clinical genetic testing among cancer patients: a study protocol for a 3-arm randomized controlled trial. Trials 2023; 24:105. [PMID: 36765432 PMCID: PMC9911941 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-023-07125-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2022] [Accepted: 01/28/2023] [Indexed: 02/12/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although most cancers are sporadic, germline genetic variants are implicated in 5-10% of cancer cases. Clinical genetic testing identifies pathogenic germline genetic variants for hereditary cancers. The Michigan Genetic Hereditary Testing (MiGHT) study is a three-arm randomized clinical trial that aims to test the efficacy of two patient-level behavioral interventions on uptake of cancer genetic testing. METHODS The two interventions being tested are (1) a virtual genetics navigator and (2) motivational interviewing by genetic health coaches. Eligible participants are adults with a diagnosis of breast, prostate, endometrial, ovarian, colorectal, or pancreatic cancer who meet the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for genetic testing. Participants are recruited through community oncology practices affiliated with the Michigan Oncology Quality Consortium (MOQC) and have used the Family Health History Tool (FHHT) to determine testing eligibility. The recruitment goal is 759 participants, who will be randomized to usual care or to either the virtual genetics navigator or the motivational interviewing intervention arms. The primary outcome will be the proportion of individuals who complete germline genetic testing within 6 months. DISCUSSION This study addresses patient-level factors which are associated with the uptake of genetic testing. The study will test two different intervention approaches, both of which can help address the shortage of genetic counselors and improve access to care. TRIAL REGISTRATION This study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of the University of Michigan Medical School (HUM00192898) and registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05162846).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Jennifer J Griggs
- University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, USA
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA
- University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - Ken Resnicow
- University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, USA
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - Kelley M Kidwell
- University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, USA
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - Emerson Delacroix
- University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - Sarah Austin
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - Erika N Hanson
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - Elizabeth Bacon
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - Erika Koeppe
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
| | | | | | | | - Shayna Weiner
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - Sarah T Hawley
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - Wendy R Uhlmann
- University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - J Scott Roberts
- University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, USA
| | - Elena M Stoffel
- University of Michigan Rogel Cancer Center, Ann Arbor, USA
- University of Michigan School of Medicine, Ann Arbor, USA
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Resnicow K, Delacroix E, Chen G, Austin S, Stoffel E, Hanson EN, Gerido LH, Kaphingst KA, Yashar BM, Marvin M, Griggs JJ, Cragun D. Motivational interviewing for genetic counseling: A unified framework for persuasive and equipoise conversations. J Genet Couns 2022; 31:1020-1031. [PMID: 35906848 PMCID: PMC9796431 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1609] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/10/2022] [Revised: 05/31/2022] [Accepted: 06/12/2022] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
Genetic counselors (GCs) have traditionally been trained to adopt a position of equipoise or clinical neutrality. They provide information, answer questions, address barriers, and engage in shared decision-making, but generally, they do not prescribe a genetic test. Historically, GCs have generally been trained not to persuade the ambivalent or resistant patient. More recently, however, there has been discussion regarding when a greater degree of persuasion or directionality may be appropriate within genetic counseling (GC) and what role MI may play in this process. The role for "persuasive GC" is based on the premise that some genetic tests provide actionable information that would clearly benefit patients and families by impacting treatment or surveillance. For other tests, the benefits are less clear as they do not directly impact patient care or the benefits may be more subjective in nature, driven by patient values or psychological needs. For the former, we propose that GCs may adopt a more persuasive clinical approach while for the latter, a more traditional equipoise stance may be more appropriate. We suggest that motivational interviewing (MI) could serve as a unifying counseling model that allows GCs to handle both persuasive and equipoise encounters. For clearly beneficial tests, while directional, the MI encounter can still be non-directive, autonomy-supportive, and patient-centered. MI can also be adapted for equipoise situations, for example, placing less emphasis on eliciting and strengthening change talk as that is more a behavior change strategy than a shared decision-making strategy. The core principles and strategies of MI, such as autonomy support, evocation, open questions, reflective listening, and affirmation would apply to both persuasive and equipoise encounters. Key issues that merit discussion include how best to train GCs both during their initial and post-graduate education.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ken Resnicow
- University of Michigan School of Public HealthAnn ArborMichiganUSA
- Rogel Cancer CenterUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | - Emerson Delacroix
- University of Michigan School of Public HealthAnn ArborMichiganUSA
- Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of Michigan School of MedicineAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | - Gabriela Chen
- University of Michigan School of Public HealthAnn ArborMichiganUSA
- Genetic Counseling Graduate Training Program, Department of Human GeneticsUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | - Sarah Austin
- Rogel Cancer CenterUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | - Elena Stoffel
- Rogel Cancer CenterUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborMichiganUSA
- Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of Michigan School of MedicineAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | - Erika N. Hanson
- Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of Michigan School of MedicineAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | | | - Kimberly A. Kaphingst
- Department of CommunicationUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUtahUSA
- Huntsman Cancer InstituteUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUtahUSA
| | - Beverly M. Yashar
- Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of Michigan School of MedicineAnn ArborMichiganUSA
- Genetic Counseling Graduate Training Program, Department of Human GeneticsUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | - Monica Marvin
- Rogel Cancer CenterUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborMichiganUSA
- Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of Michigan School of MedicineAnn ArborMichiganUSA
- Genetic Counseling Graduate Training Program, Department of Human GeneticsUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | - Jennifer J. Griggs
- University of Michigan School of Public HealthAnn ArborMichiganUSA
- Rogel Cancer CenterUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborMichiganUSA
- Department of Internal MedicineUniversity of Michigan School of MedicineAnn ArborMichiganUSA
| | - Deborah Cragun
- University of South Florida, College of Public HealthTampaFloridaUSA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Campbell-Salome G, Walters NL, Ladd IG, Sheldon A, Ahmed CD, Brangan A, McMinn MN, Rahm AK, Schwartz MLB, Tricou E, Fisher CL, Sturm AC. Motivating cascade testing for familial hypercholesterolemia: applying the extended parallel process model for clinician communication. Transl Behav Med 2022; 12:800-809. [PMID: 35429393 PMCID: PMC9291357 DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibac018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Motivating at-risk relatives to undergo cascade testing for familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is critical for diagnosis and lifesaving treatment. As credible sources of information, clinicians can assist in family communication about FH and motivate cascade testing uptake. However, there are no guidelines regarding how clinicians should effectively communicate with probands (the first person diagnosed in the family) and at-risk relatives. Individuals and families with FH can inform our understanding of the most effective communications to promote cascade testing. Guided by the extended parallel process model (EPPM), we analyzed the perspectives of individuals and families with FH for effective messaging clinicians can use to promote cascade testing uptake. We analyzed narrative data from interviews and surveys collected as part of a larger mixed-methods study. The EPPM was used to identify message features recommended by individuals and families with FH that focus on four key constructs (severity, susceptibility, response efficacy, self-efficacy) to promote cascade testing. Participants included 22 individuals from 11 dyadic interviews and 98 survey respondents. Participants described prioritizing multiple messages that address each EPPM construct to alert relatives about their risk. They illustrated strategies clinicians could use within each EPPM construct to communicate to at-risk relatives about the importance of pursuing diagnosis via cascade testing and subsequent treatment for high cholesterol due to FH. Findings provide guidance on effective messaging to motivate cascade testing uptake for FH and demonstrates how the EPPM may guide communication with at-risk relatives about genetic risk and motivate cascade testing broadly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gemme Campbell-Salome
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, USA
- College of Journalism and Communications, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | | | - Ilene G Ladd
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, USA
| | | | | | - Andrew Brangan
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, USA
| | - Megan N McMinn
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, USA
| | - Alanna K Rahm
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, USA
| | | | - Eric Tricou
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, USA
| | - Carla L Fisher
- College of Journalism and Communications, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
| | - Amy C Sturm
- Genomic Medicine Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, USA
- Heart Institute, Geisinger, Danville, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Winchester B, Cragun D, Redlinger-Grosse K, Walters ST, Ash E, Baldry E, Zierhut H. Application of motivational interviewing strategies with the extended parallel process model to improve risk communication for parents of children with familial hypercholesterolemia. J Genet Couns 2022; 31:847-859. [PMID: 35150174 DOI: 10.1002/jgc4.1554] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2021] [Revised: 01/10/2021] [Accepted: 01/14/2021] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
Current genetic counseling practice has not been found to significantly increase risk communication between family members. A more diverse set of genetic counseling approaches may be needed. A genetic counseling intervention based on motivational interviewing principles and the extended parallel process model was utilized to increase cascade outcomes within families with familial hypercholesterolemia, a common, underdiagnosed, and treatable condition. Parents of children with familial hypercholesterolemia were invited to participate in an online pre-survey, single-session genetic counseling intervention, and post-intervention surveys as a part of the CHEERS (Cholesterol Evaluation to Explore Risk Screening) intervention. This study investigated the efficacy of a genetic counselor delivered motivational interviewing intervention and how parents of children with familial hypercholesterolemia react by assessing family member cholesterol screening and risk communication to at-risk relatives. Transcripts were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed for change talk using the Motivational Interviewing Skill Code version 2.1. Participant surveys were analyzed for self-reported extended parallel process constructs and motivations. Coincidence analysis was conducted to explore differences between those with and without positive cascade outcomes within 12 months after the intervention. On average, change talk increased during the session in order of the extended parallel process constructs (perceived severity, susceptibility, response efficacy, self-efficacy). Coincidence analysis revealed that 6 of the 7 cases with positive cascade outcomes were explained by either the presence of high change talk during the intervention or presence of positive motivations shortly after, while 5 of the 5 cases without a positive outcome lacked both of these key factors that were associated with cascade outcomes. Results of this study suggest that incorporating motivational interviewing and the extended parallel process model increases change talk and that the presence of either high levels of change talk or positive motivations is associated with positive cascade outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bridget Winchester
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, & Development, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Deborah Cragun
- College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA
| | - Krista Redlinger-Grosse
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, & Development, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Scott T Walters
- School of Public Health, University of North Texas Health Science Center, Fort Worth, Texas, USA
| | - Erin Ash
- Genetic Counseling Program, Sarah Lawrence College, Bronxville, New York, USA
| | - Emma Baldry
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, & Development, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| | - Heather Zierhut
- Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, & Development, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|