A randomized trial of a prenatal genetic testing interactive computerized information aid

Genetics Navigator: protocol for a mixed methods randomized controlled trial evaluating a digital platform to deliver genomic services in Canadian pediatric and adult populations

INTRODUCTION

Genetic testing is used across medical disciplines leading to unprecedented demand for genetic services. This has resulted in excessive waitlists and unsustainable pressure on the standard model of genetic healthcare. Alternative models are needed; e-health tools represent scalable and evidence-based solution. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of the Genetics Navigator, an interactive patient-centred digital platform that supports the collection of medical and family history, provision of pregenetic and postgenetic counselling and return of genetic testing results across paediatric and adult settings.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will evaluate the effectiveness of the Genetics Navigator combined with usual care by a genetics clinician (physician or counsellor) to usual care alone in a randomised controlled trial. One hundred and thirty participants (adults patients or parents of paediatric patients) eligible for genetic testing through standard of care will be recruited across Ontario genetics clinics. Participants randomised into the intervention arm will use the Genetics Navigator for pretest and post-test genetic counselling and results disclosure in conjunction with their clinician. Participants randomised into the control arm will receive usual care, that is, clinician-delivered pretest and post-test genetic counselling, and results disclosure. The primary outcome is participant distress 2 weeks after test results disclosure. Secondary outcomes include knowledge, decisional conflict, anxiety, empowerment, quality of life, satisfaction, acceptability, digital health literacy and health resource use. Quantitative data will be analysed using statistical hypothesis tests and regression models. A subset of participants will be interviewed to explore user experience; data will be analysed using interpretive description. A cost-effectiveness analysis will examine the incremental cost of the Navigator compared with usual care per unit reduction in distress or unit improvement in quality of life from public payer and societal perspectives.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by Clinical Trials Ontario. Results will be shared through stakeholder workshops, national and international conferences and peer-reviewed journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT06455384.

The effect of a prior e-learning tool on genetic counseling outcomes in diverse ethnic couples with abnormal Down syndrome screening tests: A randomized controlled trial

Genetic counseling (GC) following abnormal Down syndrome (DS) screening tests aims to ensure learning of complex medical concepts and discussion of counselees' personal desires. Pre-GC use of electronic learning tools (e-learning tools) can facilitate GC sessions by allowing more time for dialogue rather than learning medical and genetic concepts, enabling greater focus on the counselee's decisional, psychological, and personal needs. Few studies have investigated such tools for DS screening tests and those who have focused on screening uptake rather than abnormal results and implications. This study evaluated prenatal GC outcomes following implementation of an e-learning tool utilizing an educational animated movie for couples of varied ethnic backgrounds in northern Israel, with abnormal DS screening tests. E-learning tool impact was assessed as knowledge level, informed choices, satisfaction with the intervention and GC process, the state of anxiety and duration of the GC meeting. The 321 study participants were randomized to three groups: animation movie, booklet, and control. All participants had been asked to complete pre- and post-counseling questionnaires. Outcome scores were compared between the research groups. Results showed increased knowledge level in general among participants in the animation group; among minority participants, the highest knowledge level was in the animation group. Anxiety levels and informed choices were not statistically different among the groups. However, watching the animation, Jewish ethnicity, good level of genetic literacy, and academic degree were significant predictors of informed choice, and those who watched the animation were three times more likely to make an informed choice than the control group. Our findings suggest that this e-learning tool is efficient and acceptable for the general population. Special attention is needed for minorities with lower genetic literacy and education.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

Patient decision aids are interventions designed to support people making health decisions. At a minimum, patient decision aids make the decision explicit, provide evidence-based information about the options and associated benefits/harms, and help clarify personal values for features of options. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2003 and last updated in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of patient decision aids in adults considering treatment or screening decisions using an integrated knowledge translation approach.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted the updated search for the period of 2015 (last search date) to March 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EBSCO, and grey literature. The cumulative search covers database origins to March 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids to usual care. Usual care was defined as general information, risk assessment, clinical practice guideline summaries for health consumers, placebo intervention (e.g. information on another topic), or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted intervention and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made (informed values-based choice congruence) and the decision-making process, such as knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, feeling informed, clear values, participation in decision-making, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were choice, confidence in decision-making, adherence to the chosen option, preference-linked health outcomes, and impact on the healthcare system (e.g. consultation length). We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of 105 studies that were included in the previous review version compared to those published since that update (n = 104 studies). We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

This update added 104 new studies for a total of 209 studies involving 107,698 participants. The patient decision aids focused on 71 different decisions. The most common decisions were about cardiovascular treatments (n = 22 studies), cancer screening (n = 17 studies colorectal, 15 prostate, 12 breast), cancer treatments (e.g. 15 breast, 11 prostate), mental health treatments (n = 10 studies), and joint replacement surgery (n = 9 studies). When assessing risk of bias in the included studies, we rated two items as mostly unclear (selective reporting: 100 studies; blinding of participants/personnel: 161 studies), due to inadequate reporting. Of the 209 included studies, 34 had at least one item rated as high risk of bias. There was moderate-certainty evidence that patient decision aids probably increase the congruence between informed values and care choices compared to usual care (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.13; 21 studies, 9377 participants). Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, there was high-certainty evidence that patient decision aids result in improved participants' knowledge (MD 11.90/100, 95% CI 10.60 to 13.19; 107 studies, 25,492 participants), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.34; 25 studies, 7796 participants), and decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -10.02, 95% CI -12.31 to -7.74; 58 studies, 12,104 participants), indecision about personal values (MD -7.86, 95% CI -9.69 to -6.02; 55 studies, 11,880 participants), and proportion of people who were passive in decision-making (clinician-controlled) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.88; 21 studies, 4348 participants). For adverse outcomes, there was high-certainty evidence that there was no difference in decision regret between the patient decision aid and usual care groups (MD -1.23, 95% CI -3.05 to 0.59; 22 studies, 3707 participants). Of note, there was no difference in the length of consultation when patient decision aids were used in preparation for the consultation (MD -2.97 minutes, 95% CI -7.84 to 1.90; 5 studies, 420 participants). When patient decision aids were used during the consultation with the clinician, the length of consultation was 1.5 minutes longer (MD 1.50 minutes, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.20; 8 studies, 2702 participants). We found the same direction of effect when we compared results for patient decision aid studies reported in the previous update compared to studies conducted since 2015.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care, across a wide variety of decisions, patient decision aids probably helped more adults reach informed values-congruent choices. They led to large increases in knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, and an active role in decision-making. Our updated review also found that patient decision aids increased patients' feeling informed and clear about their personal values. There was no difference in decision regret between people using decision aids versus those receiving usual care. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of patient decision aids on adherence and downstream effects on cost and resource use.

Picture this: Evaluating the efficacy of genetic counseling visual aids

Visual aids have been validated as effective tools for educating patients in a variety of medical settings. However, research exploring the efficacy and potential benefit of genetic counseling visual aids is lacking. To begin to address this gap, this study assessed participant knowledge of genetic counseling concepts after viewing either visual or non-visual educational content. Participants were recruited from the general population using the crowdsourcing platform Mechanical Turk. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were carried out to evaluate differences in knowledge survey scores between the visual and non-visual groups, and Poisson regression models were fitted to evaluate these differences across a variety of demographic backgrounds. The visual group had equal or higher scores than the non-visual group across all analyses. The difference in group scores was statistically significant for autosomal recessive inheritance knowledge scores (p < 0.05). In addition, this difference was approaching significance for higher-level knowledge scores (p = 0.05) and total knowledge scores in individuals who have not completed post-secondary education (p = 0.05). These results indicate that visual aids improve knowledge of specific genetic counseling concepts such as inheritance patterns; the education of which is often integral to genetic counseling. These results also indicate that visual aids may facilitate a deeper understanding of genetic counseling concepts and may be particularly valuable for individuals with lower educational backgrounds. Together, the results of this study support the inclusion of visual aids in genetic counseling education to help improve patient understanding and the accessibility of genetic healthcare information.

Exploring measurement tools used to assess knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of pregnant women toward prenatal screening: A systematic review

There is a lack of standardized measurement tools globally to assess knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions of expecting women toward prenatal screening. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify reasons women pursue or decline prenatal screening and compare the strengths and limitations of available measurement tools used to assess pregnant women's perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes toward prenatal screening. This review followed the five-step York methodology by Arksey and O'Malley and incorporated recommendations from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis checklist for the extraction, analysis, and presentation of results. The five steps consisted of: (1) identification of the research questions; (2) searching for relevant studies; (3) selection of studies relevant to the research questions; (4) data charting; and (5) collation, summarization, and reporting of results. Four online databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) were selected after the librarian's development of a detailed search strategy. The Rayyan platform was used between June 2023 and August 2023 to epitomize the articles produced from our search. A total of 68 eligible studies were included in the analysis. The top five major reasons for declining prenatal screening uptake included (1) being unsure of the risk of prenatal screening and harm to the baby or miscarriage (n = 15), (2) not considering action such as termination of pregnancy for prenatal screening to be considered as necessary (n = 14), (3) high cost (n = 12), (4) lack of knowledge about testing procedures and being anxious about the test (n = 10), and (5) being worried about probability of false negative or false positive results (n = 6). Only 32 studies utilized scientifically validated instruments. Difficulties in capturing representative, adequately sized samples inclusive of diverse ethnicities and demographics were pervasive. Findings highlight the need for rigorous validation of research measurement methodologies to ensure the accuracy and applicability of resulting data regarding the assessment of prenatal screening perceptions, knowledge, and attitudes across diverse female populations.Registration: N/A.

Effectiveness of Interactive Digital Decision Aids in Prenatal Screening Decision-making: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Increasing prenatal screening options and limited consultation time have made it difficult for pregnant women to participate in shared decision-making. Interactive digital decision aids (IDDAs) could integrate interactive technology into health care to a facilitate higher-quality decision-making process.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of IDDAs on pregnant women's decision-making regarding prenatal screening.

METHODS

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, Google Scholar, and reference lists of included studies until August 2021. We included the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the use of IDDAs (fulfilling basic criteria of International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration and these were interactive and digital) as an adjunct to standard care with standard care alone and involved pregnant women themselves in prenatal screening decision-making. Data on primary outcomes, that is, knowledge and decisional conflict, and secondary outcomes were extracted, and meta-analyses were conducted based on standardized mean differences (SMDs). Subgroup analysis based on knowledge was performed. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for risk-of-bias assessment.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs were identified from 10,283 references, of which 7 were included in quantitative synthesis. Analyses showed that IDDAs increased knowledge (SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.26-0.90) and decreased decisional conflict (SMD -0.15, 95% CI -0.25 to -0.05). Substantial heterogeneity in knowledge was identified, which could not be completely resolved through subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

IDDAs can improve certain aspects of decision-making in prenatal screening among pregnant women, but the results require cautious interpretation.

Digital health-enabled genomics: Opportunities and challenges

Digital health solutions, with apps, virtual care, and electronic medical records, are gaining momentum across all medical disciplines, and their adoption has been accelerated, in part, by the COVID-19 pandemic. Personal wearables, sensors, and mobile technologies are increasingly being used to identify health risks and assist in diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring of health and disease. Genomics is a vanguard of digital healthcare as we witness a convergence of the fields of genomic and digital medicine. Spurred by the acute need to increase health literacy, empower patients' preference-sensitive decisions, or integrate vast amounts of complex genomic data into the clinical workflow, there has been an emergence of digital support tools in genomics-enabled care. We present three use cases that demonstrate the application of these converging technologies: digital genomics decision support tools, conversational chatbots to scale the genetic counseling process, and the digital delivery of comprehensive genetic services. These digital solutions are important to facilitate patient-centered care delivery, improve patient outcomes, and increase healthcare efficiencies in genomic medicine. Yet the development of these innovative digital genomic technologies also reveals strategic challenges that need to be addressed before genomic digital health can be broadly adopted. Alongside key evidentiary gaps in clinical and cost-effectiveness, there is a paucity of clinical guidelines, policy, and regulatory frameworks that incorporate digital health. We propose a research agenda, guided by learning healthcare systems, to realize the vision of digital health-enabled genomics to ensure its sustainable and equitable deployment in clinical care.

Multisite assessment of the impact of a prenatal testing educational App on patient knowledge and preparedness for prenatal testing decision making

In this study, we wanted to assess the impact of the use of a patient educational app on patient knowledge about noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and preparedness for prenatal screening decision-making. A randomized control study was carried out at three international sites between January 2019 and October 2020. Study participants completed a pre-consultation survey and post-consultation survey to assess knowledge, satisfaction, and preparedness for prenatal screening consultation. Providers completed a post-consultation survey. In the control arm, the pre-consultation survey was completed prior to consultation with their prenatal care provider. In the intervention arm, the pre-consultation survey was completed after using the app but prior to consultation with their prenatal care provider. Mean knowledge scores in the 203 participants using the app were significantly higher pre-consultation (p < 0.001) and post-consultation (p < 0.005) than those not using the app. Higher pre-consultation knowledge scores in the intervention group were observed at all sites. Most (86%) app users stated they were "Satisfied" or "Very Satisfied" with it as a tool. Providers rated the intervention group as more prepared than controls (p = 0.027); provider assessment of knowledge was not significantly different (p = 0.073). This study shows that clinical implementation of a patient educational app in a real-world setting was feasible, acceptable to pregnant people, and positively impacted patient knowledge.

Health Literacy among Pregnant Women in a Lifestyle Intervention Trial

Health literacy plays a crucial role during pregnancy, influencing the mother's health behavior which in turn affects the unborn child's health. To date, there are only few studies that report on health literacy among pregnant women or even interventions to promote health literacy. GeMuKi (acronym for "Gemeinsam Gesund: Vorsorge plus für Mutter und Kind"-Strengthening health promotion: enhanced check-up visits for mother and child) is a cluster-randomized controlled trial, aimed at improving health literacy in pregnant women by means of a lifestyle intervention in the form of brief counseling. The women in the intervention group receive counseling on lifestyle topics, such as nutrition and physical activity, during their regular prenatal check-ups. The counseling is tailored to the needs of pregnant women. Demographic data is collected at baseline using a paper-based questionnaire. Data on health literacy is collected using the Health Literacy Survey Europe with 16 items (HLS-EU-16) at baseline and the Brief Health Literacy Screener (BHLS) questionnaire at two points during the pregnancy by means of an app, which was developed specifically for the purpose of the project. The results of the study indicate that around 61.9% of the women participating in the GeMuKi study have an adequate level of health literacy at baseline. The regression analyses (general estimating equations) showed no significant effect of the GeMuKi intervention on general health literacy as measured by the BHLS (ß = 0.086, 95% CI [-0.016-0.187]). However, the intervention was significantly positively associated with pregnancy specific knowledge on lifestyle (ß = 0.089, 95% CI [0.024-0.154]). The results of this study indicate that GeMuKi was effective in improving specific pregnancy related knowledge, but did not improve general health literacy.

The role of digital patient education in maternal health: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the recent trends, acceptability, and effectiveness of digital maternal patient education through summarizing the literature.

METHODS

Articles published in 2010-2020 on patient education, digital tools, and maternal health were searched on PubMed. Abstract and full texts were reviewed to identify eligible studies and extract key information.

RESULTS

Digital patient education studies covered various topics throughout pregnancy, with the greatest number of studies targeting the prenatal period. Among the 55 studies, 38 (69%) reported significant patient outcomes, with the main benefits of increased knowledge (83.3%), emotional benefits (73.7%), and behavioral changes (60.6%). The number of studies per year increased steadily over the past decade, with frequently utilized formats of texts with images (40%), SMS (30.9%), and videos (25.5%). Video produced the highest rate of positive patient outcomes; however, no statistical significance was found.

CONCLUSION

Our study presented evidence supporting the high effectiveness and prevalence of digital tools in maternal patient education, and analyzed the content, platforms, and formats utilized by digital tools of the past decade.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Digital tools are effective and feasible in conducting maternal patient education. No specific patient education format is found to be superior in improving patient's health outcomes.

Decision coaching for people making healthcare decisions

BACKGROUND

Decision coaching is non-directive support delivered by a healthcare provider to help patients prepare to actively participate in making a health decision. 'Healthcare providers' are considered to be all people who are engaged in actions whose primary intent is to protect and improve health (e.g. nurses, doctors, pharmacists, social workers, health support workers such as peer health workers). Little is known about the effectiveness of decision coaching.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of decision coaching (I) for people facing healthcare decisions for themselves or a family member (P) compared to (C) usual care or evidence-based intervention only, on outcomes (O) related to preparation for decision making, decisional needs and potential adverse effects.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library (Wiley), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (Ebsco), Nursing and Allied Health Source (ProQuest), and Web of Science from database inception to June 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where the intervention was provided to adults or children preparing to make a treatment or screening healthcare decision for themselves or a family member. Decision coaching was defined as: a) delivered individually by a healthcare provider who is trained or using a protocol; and b) providing non-directive support and preparing an adult or child to participate in a healthcare decision. Comparisons included usual care or an alternate intervention. There were no language restrictions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened citations, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data on characteristics of the intervention(s) and outcomes. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion to reach consensus. We used the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as the measures of treatment effect and, where possible, synthesised results using a random-effects model. If more than one study measured the same outcome using different tools, we used a random-effects model to calculate the standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI. We presented outcomes in summary of findings tables and applied GRADE methods to rate the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Out of 12,984 citations screened, we included 28 studies of decision coaching interventions alone or in combination with evidence-based information, involving 5509 adult participants (aged 18 to 85 years; 64% female, 52% white, 33% African-American/Black; 68% post-secondary education). The studies evaluated decision coaching used for a range of healthcare decisions (e.g. treatment decisions for cancer, menopause, mental illness, advancing kidney disease; screening decisions for cancer, genetic testing). Four of the 28 studies included three comparator arms.  For decision coaching compared with usual care (n = 4 studies), we are uncertain if decision coaching compared with usual care improves any outcomes (i.e. preparation for decision making, decision self-confidence, knowledge, decision regret, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low.  For decision coaching compared with evidence-based information only (n = 4 studies), there is low certainty-evidence that participants exposed to decision coaching may have little or no change in knowledge (SMD -0.23, 95% CI: -0.50 to 0.04; 3 studies, 406 participants). There is low certainty-evidence that participants exposed to decision coaching may have little or no change in anxiety, compared with evidence-based information. We are uncertain if decision coaching compared with evidence-based information improves other outcomes (i.e. decision self-confidence, feeling uninformed) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. For decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with usual care (n = 17 studies), there is low certainty-evidence that participants may have improved knowledge (SMD 9.3, 95% CI: 6.6 to 12.1; 5 studies, 1073 participants). We are uncertain if decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with usual care improves other outcomes (i.e. preparation for decision making, decision self-confidence, feeling uninformed, unclear values, feeling unsupported, decision regret, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. For decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with evidence-based information only (n = 7 studies), we are uncertain if decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with evidence-based information only improves any outcomes (i.e. feeling uninformed, unclear values, feeling unsupported, knowledge, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Decision coaching may improve participants' knowledge when used with evidence-based information. Our findings do not indicate any significant adverse effects (e.g. decision regret, anxiety) with the use of decision coaching. It is not possible to establish strong conclusions for other outcomes. It is unclear if decision coaching always needs to be paired with evidence-informed information. Further research is needed to establish the effectiveness of decision coaching for a broader range of outcomes.

Interventions aiming to improve informed decision on prenatal screening and testing: A scoping review of the literature

The aim of this scoping review was to explore interventions and their effect in facilitating decision making on prenatal screening and testing among pregnant women. This review was conducted according to the Joanna Briggs Institute Methods Manual for scoping reviews. Studies published 2000-2019 that consist of interventions to facilitate pregnant women's decision making in prenatal screening and testing were specifically reviewed. A total of 27 studies are included in this scoping review. In these studies, various methods, including face-to-face individual or group interventions, e-Health interventions, video-based interventions, written educational materials, and decision aid interventions, were developed and tested for their effectiveness in facilitating informed decision making on prenatal screening and testing. While these methods appeared to be effective, further studies involving diverse populations are needed to integrate them into practice. Genetic counselors and healthcare providers working with individuals who are referred for genetic education and counseling need to work collaboratively to facilitate informed decisions on prenatal screening of women and/or their partners.

Decision aids for prenatal testing: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

To analyse the effect of decision aids (DAs) used by pregnant women on prenatal testing decisions.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA RESOURCES

We searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Library ending October 2020.

REVIEW METHODS

Papers were selected for analysis in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The meta-analysis was carried out using Review Manager 5.3 software. The quality of the studies was assessed using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook. The result is knowledge, decision conflict, anxiety and other secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. Comprehensive analysis showed that DAs could significantly improve knowledge and decision-making satisfaction, reduce decision conflict, increase the proportion of women who make informed choice and had no influence on anxiety and decision regret.

CONCLUSIONS

This article systematically reviewed the positive effect of DAs on the decision-making of pregnant women facing prenatal testing. In the future, nurses should be encouraged to develop DAs in accordance with strict standards and apply them to pregnant women of different backgrounds.

IMPACT

There is a growing consensus that health care should be patient-centred, and the values and preferences of pregnant women who undergo prenatal testing need to be incorporated into the clinical decision-making process. This review reports that the use of DAs can increase pregnant women's chances of participating in prenatal testing decisions and may improve the quality of their decision-making. It also provides information on the role and practice of nurses in promoting evidence-based prenatal testing for DAs.

Health Literacy in Pregnant Women: A Systematic Review

Health literacy plays a crucial role during pregnancy, as the mother’s health behavior influences both her own health and that of her child. To the authors’ best knowledge, no comprehensive overview on evidence of the health literacy of pregnant women and its impact on health outcomes during pregnancy exists. Therefore, this review aims to assess health literacy levels in pregnant women, whether health literacy is associated with outcomes during pregnancy and whether effective interventions exist to improve the health literacy of pregnant women. A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed and EBSCO, resulting in 14 studies. The results show mixed levels of health literacy in pregnant women. Limited health literacy is associated with unhealthy behaviors during pregnancy. Mixed health literacy levels can be attributed to the recruitment site, the number of participants and the measurement tool used. Quality assessment reveals that the quality of the included studies is moderate to good. The review revealed that randomized controlled trials and interventions to improve health literacy in pregnant women are rare or do not exist. This is crucial in the light of the mixed health literacy levels found among pregnant women. Healthcare providers play a key role in this context, as pregnant women with limited health literacy rely on them as sources of health information.

Psychological outcomes, knowledge and preferences of pregnant women on first-trimester screening for fetal structural abnormalities: A prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The primary aim of this study is to investigate the impact of a 13-week anomaly scan on the experienced levels of maternal anxiety and well-being. Secondly, to explore women's knowledge on the possibilities and limitations of the scan and the preferred timing of screening for structural abnormalities.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a prospective-cohort study conducted between 2013-2015, pregnant women in the North-Netherlands underwent a 13-week anomaly scan. Four online-questionnaires (Q1, Q2, Q3 and Q4) were completed before and after the 13- and the 20-week anomaly scans. In total, 1512 women consented to participate in the study and 1118 (74%) completed the questionnaires at Q1, 941 (64%) at Q2, 807 (55%) at Q3 and 535 (37%) at Q4. Psychological outcomes were measured by the state-trait inventory-scale (STAI), the patient's positive-negative affect (PANAS) and ad-hoc designed questionnaires.

RESULTS

Nine-nine percent of women wished to be informed as early as possible in pregnancy about the absence/presence of structural abnormalities. In 87% of women levels of knowledge on the goals and limitations of the 13-week anomaly scan were moderate-to-high. In women with a normal 13-week scan result, anxiety levels decreased (P < .001) and well-being increased over time (P < .001). In women with false-positive results (n = 26), anxiety levels initially increased (STAI-Q1: 39.8 vs. STAI-Q2: 48.6, P = 0.025), but later decreased around the 20-week anomaly scan (STAI-Q3: 36.4 vs. STAI-Q4: 34.2, P = 0.36).

CONCLUSIONS

The 13-week scan did not negatively impact the psychological well-being of pregnant women. The small number of women with screen-positive results temporarily experienced higher anxiety after the scan but, in false-positive cases, anxiety levels normalized again when the abnormality was not confirmed at follow-up scans. Finally, most pregnant women have moderate-to-high levels of knowledge and strongly prefer early screening for fetal structural abnormalities.

Pregnant Hispanic women's views and knowledge of prenatal genetic testing

Pregnant Hispanic women are underserved with their needs for genetic counseling, despite birth defects remaining the leading cause of infant death in the United States. We present the qualitative findings of a study to understand knowledge and perceptions of prenatal testing in a sample of hard‐to‐reach underrepresented Hispanic pregnant women in South Texas. The sample for this study was 10 Hispanic pregnant women who were recruited from a high‐risk prenatal clinic in South Texas in 2019. The semi‐structured interview questions were created based on the researchers' clinical experiences with this population and were designed to examine knowledge and perceptions of participants toward prenatal testing. Analysis of the qualitative data yielded several themes related to prenatal testing: (a) knowledge, (b) confusion, (c) partner's and support persons' opinions, (d) information sharing from providers, (e) psychological benefits, (f) preparation for baby, (g) obstacles, (h) religious influence, and (i) educational tools to assist with understanding. Women's understanding and knowledge of prenatal testing was limited, specifically regarding its purpose, how it works, the benefits, and why it was recommended by their provider. Lack of clarity about why they should take the test and its risks for them and their babies was perceived as something that could impede their acceptance of prenatal testing. All participants agreed that healthcare providers should share more information about prenatal testing in a way that uses ‘everyday language' so that they can understand it better. All respondents mentioned that prenatal testing provides information about their baby's health conditions, alleviates their stress and concerns, and psychologically prepares them and their family for what is to come. Identifying ways to increase culturally appropriate education delivered by genetic counselors such as through the adoption of telemedicine and mobile technology can help fill the gap for this underserved population.

Democratizing genomics: Leveraging software to make genetics an integral part of routine care

Genetic testing can provide definitive molecular diagnoses and guide clinical management decisions from preconception through adulthood. Innovative solutions for scaling clinical genomics services are necessary if they are to transition from a niche specialty to a routine part of patient care. The expertise of specialists, like genetic counselors and medical geneticists, has traditionally been relied upon to facilitate testing and follow-up, and while ideal, this approach is limited in its ability to integrate genetics into primary care. As individuals, payors, and providers increasingly realize the value of genetics in mainstream medicine, several implementation challenges need to be overcome. These include electronic health record integration, patient and provider education, tools to stay abreast of guidelines, and simplification of the test ordering process. Currently, no single platform offers a holistic view of genetic testing that streamlines the entire process across specialties that begins with identifying at-risk patients in mainstream care settings, providing pretest education, facilitating consent and test ordering, and following up as a "genetic companion" for ongoing management. We describe our vision for using software that includes clinical-grade chatbots and decision support tools, with direct access to genetic counselors and pharmacists within a modular, integrated, end-to-end testing journey.

Interventions to Improve Health among Reproductive-Age Women of Low Health Literacy: A Systematic Review

Background: Limited or low health literacy (HL) has been associated with poor health outcomes, including inadequate self-caring and preventive behaviors. A few studies have systematically summarized the effect of interventions to improve reproductive health and care in women with insufficient HL. The main objective of the study was to investigate health care promotion interventions and examine their effectiveness on women with inadequate HL through a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT). Methods: RCTs and quasi-experimental studies that assessed HL interventions to improve reproductive health of women with low HL were included. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020137059). Results: Of the 292 records initially identified, a total of 6 articles were included for review. Five different HL screening tools were used. Four different interventions were included: educational intervention, communication skills, a multimedia interactive tool, and text adaptation to enhance reading comprehension. Not enough research practice has been conducted on the influence of interventions on HL, and thus, it is difficult to implement evidence-based interventions. Conclusions: Interventions aiming to benefit and improve HL should consider the complex web of intersectional determinants that end up shaping the opportunities of women to make optimal decisions regarding their health and care, and which may require attention to much more than clinical or service delivery factors.

Use of Decision Support Tools to Empower Pregnant Women: Systematic Review

Background

Women face many health-related decisions during pregnancy. Digitalization, new technology, and a greater focus on empowering patients have driven the development of patient-centered decision support tools.

Objective

This systematic review provides an overview of studies investigating the effect of patient-centered decision support tools for pregnant women.

Methods

We searched 5 online databases, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Scopus, from inception to December 1, 2019. Two independent researchers screened titles, abstracts, and full-texts against the inclusion criteria. All studies investigating the effect of patient-centered decision support tools for health-related issues among pregnant women were included. Study characteristics and results were extracted using the review management tool Rayyan and analyzed according to topic, type of decision support tools, control group, outcome measurements, and results.

Results

The 25 eligible studies covered a range of health topics, including prenatal screening (n=10), gestational diabetes and weight gain (n=7), lifestyle (n=3), blood pressure and preeclampsia (n=2), depression (n=1), asthma (n=1), and psychological well-being (n=1). In general, the use of decision support tools increased women's knowledge, and recording symptoms enhanced satisfaction with maternity care.

Conclusions

The opportunities created by digitalization and technology should be used to develop innovative patient-centered decision support tools tailored to support pregnant women. Effect on clinical outcomes should be documented.

Understanding Taiwanese Women's Decisional Experiences Regarding Prenatal Screening Procedures And Diagnostics: A Phenomenological Study

PURPOSE

This study sought to understand Taiwanese women's decisional experiences regarding prenatal screening procedures and diagnostics.

METHODS

A hermeneutic phenomenological design guided semistructured interviews with 33 women who were 36 weeks pregnant. Data were collected between February and October 2016. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed following hermeneutic circle to cocreate an understanding of Taiwanese women's decision-making in prenatal screening and diagnostics.

RESULTS

Women's existential experiences were derived from their decision-making process on prenatal screening procedures and diagnostics for chromosomal aneuploidy. These decisional experiences were captured by four theme clusters and eight themes, which were inductively derived from 16 meaning units: (1) accessing health information; (2) considering what was best for my baby; (3) considering family finance; and (4) feeling anxiety posttest.

CONCLUSION

Participants made informed choices on several prenatal screening procedures, ostensibly, based on their personal values and considerations. During the decision-making process, often-cited benefits of genetic screenings were emphasized, but test limitations were often unheeded. A fundamental need for supportive information in decision making was further identified with recommended strategies. Hence, a revision of traditional genetic counseling approaches is recommended. As genomics technologies are increasingly available during antenatal services, women should be sufficiently educated about them to support decision making.

The impact of pregnant women's health literacy on their health-promoting lifestyle and teratogenic risk perception

This study was conducted to determine pregnant women's health literacy level and its effect on health-promoting lifestyle and perception of teratogenic risk related to medicine. The sample of the study consisted of 326 pregnant women. Women with high health literacy have more health-promoting lifestyles and lower teratogenic risk perceptions toward using antidepressants and influenza immunization during pregnancy. This study gives baseline data on health literacy and teratogenic risk perception of medicine usage during pregnancy in Turkish women.

Genetic Counseling and Genome Sequencing in Pediatric Rare Disease

Both genome sequencing (GS) and exome sequencing (ES) have proven to be revolutionary in the diagnosis of pediatric rare disease. The diagnostic potential and increasing affordability make GS and ES more accessible as a routine clinical test in some centers. Herein, I review aspects of rare disease in pediatrics associated with the use of genomic technologies with an emphasis on the benefits and limitations of both ES and GS, complexities of variant classification, and the importance of genetic counseling. Indications for testing, the role of genetic counselors in genomic test selection, and the diagnostic potential of ES and GS in various pediatric multisystem disorders are discussed. The neonatal population represents an important cohort in pediatric rare disease. Rapid ES and GS in critically ill neonates can have an immediate impact on medical management and present unique genetic counseling challenges. This work includes reviews of recommendations for genetic counseling for families considering genome-wide sequencing, and issues of access to genetic counseling that affect clinical use and will necessitate implementation of innovative methods such as online decision aids. Finally, this work will also review the challenges of having a child with a rare disease, the impact of results from ES and GS on these families, and the role of various support agencies.

Effect of health literacy interventions on pregnancy outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Low health literacy has been associated with worse health outcomes, but little is known about the effectiveness of health literacy interventions developed for pregnant women.

AIM

To assess the effectiveness of health literacy interventions on pregnancy outcomes through a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials that assessed health literacy interventions designed to improve pregnancy outcomes were included. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018094958).

FINDINGS

Of the 1512 records initially identified, 13 studies were included. Three reported on decision-aid interventions, six on face-to-face interventions and four on written interventions (including computer-based interventions or information leaflets). The primary outcomes of interest for this systematic review were knowledge (10/13 studies) and health literacy (2/13 studies) with one study not reporting either primary outcome. A significant improvement in knowledge was found across the 10 studies, however the two studies which measured health literacy only assessed health literacy at a single time-point. Secondary outcomes including health behaviours, fetal outcomes and health-service utilisation were reported in 11 studies, with inconsistent results.

DISCUSSION

Few health literacy interventions have been developed specifically for pregnant women. Although health literacy interventions have the potential to improve knowledge and pregnancy outcomes, current evidence is limited by inconsistent outcomes and measurement, and limited use of health literacy theory to inform intervention design and content. Few studies directly measured health literacy.

CONCLUSION

More research is needed to properly assess the effect of health literacy interventions on pregnancy outcomes. This research should include consideration of health literacy theory in the development of the interventions.

Improving Patient Knowledge of Aneuploidy Testing Using an Educational Video: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of an educational video explaining aneuploidy testing.

METHODS

This was a randomized controlled trial of women with singleton pregnancies having aneuploidy testing at less than 14 weeks of gestation from September 2016 to March 2017 at our prenatal ultrasound center. We developed an educational video on aneuploidy testing. Participants, stratified by age younger than or 35 years or older at estimated delivery date, were randomized to either view or not view the video before their ultrasonogram. Participants 35 years or older also met with a genetic counselor at the ultrasound appointment. All participants completed a survey assessing knowledge of genetic testing (score of 0-15) at baseline and after the appointment. The primary outcome was change in knowledge score after the intervention. A sample size of 23 per group (n=92) was planned for a total of 46 women younger than 35 years of age and 46 women aged 35 years or older. Data are presented as median (interquartile range).

RESULTS

Of 104 eligible women who were approached, 92 were randomized. Forty women aged younger than 35 years and 41 women aged 35 years or older completed the study. Baseline characteristics were similar across groups. In women younger than 35 years, the video group had a significant improvement in knowledge score (+2.0 [1.0-5.0]) compared with the control group (0 [-1.0 to 1.0]; P=.01) and reported better understanding of the information compared with the control group (P<.001) with no change in patient satisfaction (P=.25). In women 35 years or older, change in knowledge score was similar for the video and control groups (P=.98) with no difference in self-reported understanding (P=.49) or patient satisfaction (P=.30).

CONCLUSION

A patient-centered educational video explaining aneuploidy testing options improved knowledge and self-reported understanding of the information in women younger than 35 years with no change in patient satisfaction. No difference was seen for women 35 years or older, likely as a result of genetic counseling provided to these women.

Digital vs face-to-face information provision in patient counselling for prenatal screening: A noninferiority randomized controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate face‐to‐face information provision in patient counselling for prenatal screening compared with two forms of digital information provision, namely, noninteractive instructional video or interactive video.

Method

We performed a prospective, noninferiority, cluster‐randomized controlled trial comparing face‐to‐face (usual care) with two forms of digital information provision (intervention) in counselling for prenatal screening. This study was performed in the Amsterdam UMC, the Netherlands, in 2017, and included women in the first trimester of pregnancy. Main outcomes were knowledge gained by the patient and counselling duration. We performed a noninferiority analysis.

Results

One hundred forty‐one women were included, randomized, and analysed. The baseline characteristics were comparable. The intervention group was noninferior compared with the control group regarding the level of satisfaction. The knowledge grade difference was higher after using intervention, and the duration was significantly longer in the face‐to‐face group at 23 minutes versus 16 minutes. The addition of interaction with the video made no difference in any of the outcomes.

Conclusion

Adding an instructional video to patient counselling is of added value to improve patient's knowledge and shorten time consumption of the counsellor, therefore possibly saving costs. But this form of counselling maintains the same level of satisfaction.

What is already known about this topic?

Counselling for prenatal screening is a complex process containing education, information, and evaluation in order to make a well‐considered decision.

Counselling for prenatal screening has an increase in interdoctor variation and unpredictable time consumption.

What does this study add?

Digital information provision added to face‐to‐face counselling shortens the counsellors' time significantly without decreasing satisfaction and even improving knowledge.

Shortening the counsellors' time consumption can be a very cost‐effective way of saving time or increasing atient care.

Adding interactivity to patient information provision does not improve knowledge or satisfaction.

Genetic Literacy of pregnant women and their use of prenatal screening and diagnostic tests in Turkey

This study evaluated how genetic literacy of pregnant women in Turkey affects their use of prenatal screening and diagnostic tests. As a descriptive cross-sectional study, a Participant Identification Form and the Genetic literacy and Comprehension Measure (GLAC) were used to collect data. The sample of study consisted of 189 pregnant women who made regular antenatal care visits in Giresun, Turkey. The mean age was 29.5 ± 5.9 years and mean gestational week was 34.9 ± 5.09. Of the women, 76.7% had undergone prenatal screening tests, and 85.5% of them had learned about the tests from their doctors. The mean GLAC score of familiarity was 3.67 ± 1.78 (out of seven), and the genetic concepts answered correctly were 5.30 ± 1.79 (out of eight). No statistically significant relationship emerged between the women's genetic literacy and their use of prenatal screening or diagnostic tests. However, relationships were statistically significant between the genetic literacy of the women and the educational levels of the women themselves or their spouses, consanguineous marital status, parity, and use of folic acid supplements. Primiparous women who were highly educated, had a highly educated spouse, were not in consanguineous marriages, and had taken folic acid supplements during pregnancy were more literate in genetics. There is a need for more educational opportunities in order for women to increase their familiarity with genetic terms. Educating women will improve their understanding of genetics-related health services and increase their awareness of genetic diseases, which will allow them to take the appropriate actions for primary prevention.

What do people think about genetics? A systematic review

Genetics is increasingly becoming a part of modern medical practice. How people think about genetics' use in medicine and their daily lives is therefore essential. Earlier studies indicated mixed attitudes about genetics. However, this might be changing. Using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) as a guideline, we initially reviewed 442 articles that looked at awareness, attitudes, knowledge, and perception of risks among the general and targeted recruitment populations. After fitting our criteria (from the last 5 years, conducted in the USA, non-provider populations, quantitative results reported, and assessed participants 18 years and older), finally 51 eligible articles were thematically coded and presented in this paper. Awareness is reported as relatively high in the studies reviewed. Attitudes are mixed but with higher proportions reporting positive attitudes towards genetic testing and counseling. Self-reported knowledge is reasonably high, specifically with the effects of specific programs developed to raise knowledge levels of the general and targeted recruited populations. Perception of risk is somewhat aligned with actual risk. With the reasonable positive reports of genetic awareness and knowledge, there is similar positive attitude and perception of risk, supporting the need for continued dissemination of such knowledge. Given interest in incorporating community participation in genomic educational strategies, we provide this review as a baseline from which to launch community-specific educational supports and tools.

Assessing an Interactive Online Tool to Support Parents' Genomic Testing Decisions

Clinical use of genome-wide sequencing (GWS) requires pre-test genetic counseling, but the availability of genetic counseling is limited. We developed an interactive online decision-support tool, DECIDE, to make genetic counseling, patient education, and decision support more readily available. We performed a non-inferiority trial comparing DECIDE to standard genetic counseling to assess the clinical value of DECIDE for pre-GWS counseling. One hundred and six parents considering GWS for their children with epilepsy were randomized to conventional genetic counseling or DECIDE. Following the intervention, we measured parents' knowledge and empowerment and asked their opinions about using DECIDE. Both DECIDE and conventional genetic counseling significantly increased parents' knowledge, with no difference between groups. Empowerment also increased but by less than 2% in each group. Parents liked using DECIDE and found it useful; 81% would recommend it to others; 49% wished to use it along with a genetic counselor; 26% of parents preferred to see a genetic counselor; 7% preferred DECIDE alone; and 18% had no preference. DECIDE appears equivalent to genetic counseling at conveying information. In addition, it was highly acceptable to the majority of study participants, many of whom indicated that it was useful to their decision-making. Use of DECIDE as a pre-test tool may extend genetic counseling resources.

A comparison of face to face and group education on informed choice and decisional conflict of pregnant women about screening tests of fetal abnormalities

BACKGROUND AND GOAL

Screening of fetal anomalies is assumed as a necessary measurement in antenatal cares. The screening plans aim at empowerment of individuals to make the informed choice. This study was conducted in order to compare the effect of group and face-to-face education and decisional conflicts among the pregnant females regarding screening of fetal abnormalities.

METHODS

This study of the clinical trial was carried out on 240 pregnant women at <10-week pregnancy age in health care medical centers in Mashhad city in 2014. The form of individual-midwifery information and informed choice questionnaire and decisional conflict scale were used as tools for data collection. The face-to-face and group education course were held in two weekly sessions for intervention groups during two consecutive weeks, and the usual care was conducted for the control group. The rate of informed choice and decisional conflict was measured in pregnant women before education and also at weeks 20-22 of pregnancy in three groups. The data analysis was executed using SPSS statistical software (version 16), and statistical tests were implemented including Chi-square test, Kruskal-Wallis test, Wilcoxon test, Mann-Whitney U-test, one-way analysis of variance test, and Tukey's range test. The P < 0.05 was considered as a significant.

RESULTS

The results showed that there was statically significant difference between three groups in terms of frequency of informed choice in screening of fetal abnormalities (P = 0.001) in such a way that at next step of intervention, 62 participants (77.5%) in face-to-face education group, 64 members (80%) in group education class, and 20 persons (25%) in control group had the informed choice regarding screening tests, but there was no statistically significant difference between two individual and group education classes. Similarly, during the postintervention phase, there was a statistically significant difference in mean score of decisional conflict scale among pregnant women regarding screening tests in three groups (P = 0.001).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

With respect to effectiveness of group and face-to-face education methods in increasing the informed choice and reduced decisional conflict in pregnant women regarding screening tests, each of these education methods may be employed according to the clinical environment conditions and requirement to encourage the women for conducting the screening tests.

eHealth literacy research-Quo vadis?

The concept of electronic health (eHealth) literacy evolved from the social and information sciences and describes competencies necessary to use electronic health services. As it is a rather new topic, and as there is no current overview of the state of the art in research, it is not possible to identify research gaps. Therefore, the objective of this viewpoint article is to increase knowledge on the current state of the art of research in eHealth literacy and to identify gaps in scientific research which should be focused on by the research community in the future. The article provides a current viewpoint of the concept of eHealth literacy and related research. Gaps can be found in terms of a missing "gold standard" regarding both the definition and the measurement of eHealth literacy. Furthermore, there is a need for identifying the implications on eHealth developers, which evolve from the measurement of eHealth literacy in eHealth users. Finally, a stronger inclusion of health professionals, both in the evolving concept and in the measurement of eHealth literacy, is needed in the future.

Offering non-invasive prenatal testing as part of routine clinical service. Can high levels of informed choice be maintained?

Objectives

To assess rates of informed choice among women offered non‐invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy as part of routine clinical care.

Methods

A cross‐sectional survey was conducted across 6 antenatal clinics in England. Women with a high risk (≥1/150) Down syndrome screening result were offered NIPT, invasive testing, or no further testing. Pretest counselling was delivered as part of routine care by the local maternity team. Women were given a questionnaire containing a measure of informed choice immediately after pretest counselling.

Results

In total, 220 of 247 women completed the questionnaire. Seventy‐six percent were judged to have made an informed choice, a significant decline from our previous study (89.0% vs 75.6%; χ²(2) = 20.2, P < .001). Of those making an uninformed choice, 46% had insufficient knowledge, 19% had not deliberated, and 13% had made a value‐inconsistent decision. Multivariate analysis showed women who were highly educated (OR, 4.33; 95% CI, 1.08‐17.36) or had had screening in a previous pregnancy (OR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.90‐0.65) were significantly more likely to make an informed choice.

Conclusions

The findings highlight the challenges of ensuring informed choice in routine prenatal care where NIPT is not discussed at multiple points, less time is available for counselling, and written consent is not required.

What's already known about this topic?

Non‐invasive prenatal testing for aneuploidy is a highly accurate screening test, but concerns exist around potential routinisation.

Previous evidence indicated high levels of informed choice are possible, but this was a tightly controlled research setting.

What does this study add?

Non‐invasive prenatal testing can be offered within routine prenatal care in a way that facilitates high levels of informed choice.

However, the decline in rates of informed choice compared with those in the research setting highlight the challenges of offering non‐invasive prenatal testing in routine prenatal care.

Online Module for Carrier Screening in Ashkenazi Jewish Individuals Compared with In-Person Genetics Education: A Randomized Controlled Trial

To increase accessibility to genetics services for low-urgency patients seeking Ashkenazi Jewish (AJ) carrier screening, we designed an interactive computer (IC) module that provides pre-test genetics education and allows genetics professionals to order the test without meeting the patients beforehand. We compared this module with in-person genetic counseling (GC) using a randomized trial. AJ individuals were randomized to undergo genetics education via the IC module (n = 26) or GC (n = 28). We compared post-interventional genetics knowledge, perceived genetic risk, and anxiety between the two groups, after accounting for pre-interventional scores, using ANCOVA. Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test was used to compare post-interventional satisfaction. Post-interventional genetics knowledge, risk perception, or anxiety were not significantly different between the two groups after accounting for baseline scores (p = 0.50-0.54), although the data are inconclusive regarding the module's non-inferiority at a 5% margin. Post-intervention satisfaction scores were generally higher in the GC group than the IC module group. Our IC module has the potential to improve access to clinical genetics services for patients and staff, but it is not suitable for all AJ patients and cannot completely replace the benefits of in-person consultations.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

Decision aids are interventions that support patients by making their decisions explicit, providing information about options and associated benefits/harms, and helping clarify congruence between decisions and personal values.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of decision aids in people facing treatment or screening decisions.

SEARCH METHODS

Updated search (2012 to April 2015) in CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; and grey literature; includes CINAHL to September 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included published randomized controlled trials comparing decision aids to usual care and/or alternative interventions. For this update, we excluded studies comparing detailed versus simple decision aids.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made and the decision-making process.Secondary outcomes were behavioural, health, and health system effects.We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of studies that used the patient decision aid to prepare for the consultation and of those that used it in the consultation. We used GRADE to assess the strength of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 105 studies involving 31,043 participants. This update added 18 studies and removed 28 previously included studies comparing detailed versus simple decision aids. During the 'Risk of bias' assessment, we rated two items (selective reporting and blinding of participants/personnel) as mostly unclear due to inadequate reporting. Twelve of 105 studies were at high risk of bias.With regard to the attributes of the choice made, decision aids increased participants' knowledge (MD 13.27/100; 95% confidence interval (CI) 11.32 to 15.23; 52 studies; N = 13,316; high-quality evidence), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 2.10; 95% CI 1.66 to 2.66; 17 studies; N = 5096; moderate-quality evidence), and congruency between informed values and care choices (RR 2.06; 95% CI 1.46 to 2.91; 10 studies; N = 4626; low-quality evidence) compared to usual care.Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, decision aids decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -9.28/100; 95% CI -12.20 to -6.36; 27 studies; N = 5707; high-quality evidence), indecision about personal values (MD -8.81/100; 95% CI -11.99 to -5.63; 23 studies; N = 5068; high-quality evidence), and the proportion of people who were passive in decision making (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.83; 16 studies; N = 3180; moderate-quality evidence).Decision aids reduced the proportion of undecided participants and appeared to have a positive effect on patient-clinician communication. Moreover, those exposed to a decision aid were either equally or more satisfied with their decision, the decision-making process, and/or the preparation for decision making compared to usual care.Decision aids also reduced the number of people choosing major elective invasive surgery in favour of more conservative options (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.75 to 1.00; 18 studies; N = 3844), but this reduction reached statistical significance only after removing the study on prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer gene carriers (RR 0.84; 95% CI 0.73 to 0.97; 17 studies; N = 3108). Compared to usual care, decision aids reduced the number of people choosing prostate-specific antigen screening (RR 0.88; 95% CI 0.80 to 0.98; 10 studies; N = 3996) and increased those choosing to start new medications for diabetes (RR 1.65; 95% CI 1.06 to 2.56; 4 studies; N = 447). For other testing and screening choices, mostly there were no differences between decision aids and usual care.The median effect of decision aids on length of consultation was 2.6 minutes longer (24 versus 21; 7.5% increase). The costs of the decision aid group were lower in two studies and similar to usual care in four studies. People receiving decision aids do not appear to differ from those receiving usual care in terms of anxiety, general health outcomes, and condition-specific health outcomes. Studies did not report adverse events associated with the use of decision aids.In subgroup analysis, we compared results for decision aids used in preparation for the consultation versus during the consultation, finding similar improvements in pooled analysis for knowledge and accurate risk perception. For other outcomes, we could not conduct formal subgroup analyses because there were too few studies in each subgroup.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Compared to usual care across a wide variety of decision contexts, people exposed to decision aids feel more knowledgeable, better informed, and clearer about their values, and they probably have a more active role in decision making and more accurate risk perceptions. There is growing evidence that decision aids may improve values-congruent choices. There are no adverse effects on health outcomes or satisfaction. New for this updated is evidence indicating improved knowledge and accurate risk perceptions when decision aids are used either within or in preparation for the consultation. Further research is needed on the effects on adherence with the chosen option, cost-effectiveness, and use with lower literacy populations.

A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials to Assess Outcomes of Genetic Counseling

With the advancements in precision medicine and health care reform, it is critical that genetic counseling practice respond to emerging evidence to maximize client benefit. The objective of this review was to synthesize evidence on outcomes from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of genetic counseling to inform clinical practice. Seven databases were searched in conducting this review. Studies were selected for inclusion if they were: (a) RCTs published from 1990 to 2015, and (b) assessed a direct outcome of genetic counseling. Extracted data included study population, aims, and outcomes. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines. A review of 1654 abstracts identified 58 publications of 54 unique RCTs that met inclusion criteria, the vast majority of which were conducted in cancer genetic counseling setting. Twenty-seven publications assessed 'enhancements' to genetic counseling, and 31 publications compared delivery modes. The methodological rigor varied considerably, highlighting the need for attention to quality criteria in RCT design. While most studies assessed several client outcomes hypothesized to be affected by genetic counseling (e.g., psychological wellbeing, knowledge, perceived risk, patient satisfaction), disparate validated and reliable scales and other assessments were often used to evaluate the same outcome(s). This limits opportunity to compare findings across studies. While RCTs of genetic counseling demonstrate enhanced client outcomes in a number of studies and pave the way to evidence-based practice, the heterogeneity of the research questions suggest an important need for more complementary studies with consistent outcome assessments.

Health Literacy and Women's Reproductive Health: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Health literacy is thought to impact women's reproductive health, yet no comprehensive systematic reviews have been conducted on the topic. Our objective was to systematically identify, investigate, and summarize research on the relationship between health literacy and women's reproductive health knowledge, behaviors, and outcomes.

METHODS

PRISMA guidelines were used to guide this review. English language, peer-reviewed research articles indexed in MEDLINE as of February 2015 were searched, along with study results posted on Clinicaltrials.gov . Articles were included if they (1) described original data-driven research conducted in developed countries, (2) were published in a peer-reviewed journal, (3) measured health literacy using a validated assessment, (4) reported on the relationship between health literacy and reproductive health outcomes, related knowledge, or behaviors, and (5) consisted of a study population that included reproductive age women.

RESULTS

A total of 34 articles met eligibility criteria and were included in this review. Data were abstracted from articles by two study authors using a standardized form. Abstracted data were then reviewed and summarized in table format. Overall, health literacy was associated with reproductive health knowledge across a spectrum of topics. It was also related to certain health behaviors, such as prenatal vitamin use and breastfeeding. Its relationship with other reproductive behaviors and outcomes remains unclear.

CONCLUSIONS

Health literacy plays an important role in reproductive knowledge and may impact behaviors and outcomes. While further research is necessary, healthcare providers should utilize health literacy best practices now to promote high-quality care for patients.

Socioeconomic Differences in Informed Decisions About Down Syndrome Screening: A Systematic Review and Research Agenda

Supporting pregnant women to make informed choices about Down syndrome screening is widely endorsed. We reviewed the literature on: (a) the association between socioeconomic position and informed choices and decision-making about Down syndrome screening, and (b) the possible mediating variables (e.g., health literacy, numeracy skills, behavioral and communication variables) that might explain the relationship. EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched from January 1999 to September 2014. The methodological quality of studies was determined by predefined criteria regarding the research aims, study design, study population and setting, measurement tools, and statistical analysis. A total of 33 studies met the inclusion criteria. Women from lower socioeconomic groups experience greater difficulties making informed choices about Down syndrome screening compared to women from higher socioeconomic groups. Most studies focus on individual dimensions of informed decision-making rather than assessing elements in conjunction with one another. Few studies have explored why there are socioeconomic differences in women's ability to make informed screening decisions. Future work is needed to identify mediating variables in this pathway. Systematic evidence-based intervention development to improve communication, understanding, and decision-making about Down syndrome screening is needed to ensure that women have an equal opportunity to make an informed choice about screening regardless of their socioeconomic position.

Interactive e-counselling for genetics pre-test decisions: where are we now?

In-person genetic counselling (GC) is the model typically used to provide patients with information regarding their genetic testing options. Current and emerging demand for genetic testing may overburden the health care system and exceed the available numbers of genetic counsellors. Furthermore, GC is not always available at times and places convenient for patients. There is little evidence that the in-person model alone is always optimal and alternatives to in-person GC have been studied in genetics and other areas of health care. This review summarizes the published evidence between 1994 and March 2014 for interactive e-learning and decisional support e-tools that could be used in pre-test GC. A total of 21 papers from 15 heterogeneous studies of interactive e-learning tools, with or without decision aids, were reviewed. Study populations, designs, and outcomes varied widely but most used an e-tool as an adjunct to conventional GC. Knowledge acquisition and decisional comfort were achieved and the e-tools were generally well-accepted by users. In a time when health care budgets are constrained and availability of GC is limited, research is needed to determine the specific circumstances in which e-tools might replace or supplement some of the functions of genetic counsellors.