Genetic counseling content: How does it impact health behavior?

Efficacy of an online communication skill training intervention on genetic counseling students' performance during standardized patient sessions

OBJECTIVE

To examine the efficacy of a brief, online intervention designed to enhance genetic counseling students' patient-centered communication.

METHODS

Genetic counseling students and recent graduates were randomized to two groups following a baseline standardized patient (SP) session: (1) immediate intervention exposure, which consisted of five modules that taught patient-centered communication skills followed by a second SP session, or (2) delayed intervention exposure following completion of the second session. Sessions were coded using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. Short-term efficacy was assessed by comparing communication during the second session between the delayed and immediate intervention exposure groups. Longer-term efficacy was assessed by comparing communication during a third session approximately five weeks later.

RESULTS

During the second session, students in the immediate intervention exposure group (n = 18) used more emotionally responsive statements and were more likely to use teach-back than those in the delayed intervention exposure group (n = 23). Students' emotionally responsive statements decreased among the immediate intervention exposure group during the third session.

CONCLUSION

Exposure to the intervention was associated with multiple, positive changes to students' patient-centered communication behavior.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These time- and resource-efficient modules may be beneficial as an introduction to communication skills training or a supplement to existing training.

Genetic counselor implicit bias and its effects on cognitive and affective exchanges in racially discordant simulations

Previous studies have linked clinicians' implicit racial bias with less patient-centered communication between healthcare providers and patients in a variety of healthcare contexts. The current study extends this research by exploring the influence of implicit racial bias in genetic counselors' (GCs') facilitation of simulated clients' cognitive and emotional processing during genetic counseling sessions. We conducted a secondary analysis of a nationally representative sample of genetic counseling sessions of White and ethnic and/or racial minority (Black and Latinx) simulated clients with a subset of 60 GCs who had completed a Race Implicit Association Test (IAT). Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC) was applied to session transcripts to identify word use by the simulated client consistent with emotional and cognitive processing. The Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) was used to link GC statements consistent with facilitation of emotional and cognitive processing, as used in previous studies. Multiple linear regression analyses were performed to relate LIWC and RIAS variables to GC IAT scores, client race/ethnicity, and statistical interaction between GC IAT scores and client race/ethnicity. GCs used more cognitive facilitation strategies with ethnic and/or racial minority than with White clients (p = .04). There were no statistically significant associations between GCs' pro-White implicit bias and GCs' facilitation of cognitive and emotional processing or clients' use of positive, negative, or cognitive process words. While implicit bias may affect some communication processes, our analysis did not show a relationship between GC IAT score and how GCs help clients process emotional or cognitive information conveyed during a session. It is also possible that the LIWC measure of cognitive and emotional processing is not a sensitive enough measure to capture an implicit bias effect if indeed one is present.

Genetic counselors as social and behavioral scientists in the era of precision medicine

In the era of precision medicine, translating genomics into clinical care will involve answering key questions in social and behavioral research. The scope of this research addresses assessing how clients perceive and use genomic information, and how effectively genetic counseling is meeting clients' needs. Outcomes are central to enhancing practice effectiveness, improving patient outcomes, and informing cost effective services to address workforce challenges. While genetic counseling is generally thought of as a clinical practice, genetic counselors contribute to research in several ways. Counselors are actively involved in interpretation of sequence data, collaborate in clinical research teams, and serve as lead investigators. This commentary highlights genetic counselors as social and behavioral scientists and reviews evidence generated by genetic counselors, describes advanced training in research, and posits key social and behavioral research questions for genetic counseling in translating genomic science in the era of precision medicine.

The impact of genetic counselors' use of facilitative strategies on cognitive and emotional processing of genetic risk disclosure for Alzheimer's disease

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of genetic counselor (GC) communication on cognitive and emotional processing of Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk information during discussions with patients with clinical diagnoses of mild cognitive impairment and their companion.

METHODS

79 recordings and transcripts of AD risk disclosure sessions collected as part of the fourth REVEAL Trial were coded using the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS) and the Linguistic Inquiry Word Count (LIWC). Multilevel analyses were used to determine the association between GCs' use of communication facilitation strategies and patient and companion use of words indicative of cognitive and emotional processing.

RESULTS

GC used somewhat more cognitive (14%) than emotional (10%) facilitation strategies. Both patients and companions used more words indicative of cognitive (18% and 17%) than emotional (6% and 5%) processing. GC use of facilitative strategies and patient and companion use of cognitive and emotional processing words were significantly associated in both unadjusted and adjusted models (all p-values<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

GCs' use of facilitative strategies assist in cognitive and emotional processing in a way that may be linked to therapeutic benefit.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

These findings highlight mechanisms through which GCs may assist patients and companions to better understand and cope with risk information.

Genetic Testing in a Population-Based Sample of Breast and Ovarian Cancer Survivors from the REACH Randomized Trial: Cost Barriers and Moderators of Counseling Mode

Background: This study evaluates predictors of BRCA1/2 testing among breast and ovarian cancer survivors who received genetic counseling as part of a randomized trial and evaluates moderators of counseling mode on testing uptake.Methods: Predictors of BRCA1/2 testing within one year postcounseling were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression in a population-based sample of breast and ovarian cancer survivors at increased hereditary risk randomly assigned to in-person counseling (IPC; n = 379) versus telephone counseling (TC; n = 402). Variables that moderated the association between counseling mode and testing were identified by subgroup analysis.Results: Testing uptake was associated with higher perceived comparative mutation risk [OR = 1.32; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11-1.57] in the adjusted analysis. Those without cost barriers had higher testing uptake (OR = 18.73; 95% CI, 7.09-49.46). Psychologic distress and perceived comparative mutation risk moderated the effect of counseling and testing. Uptake between IPC versus TC did not differ at low levels of distress and risk, but differed at high distress (26.3% TC vs. 44.3% IPC) and high perceived comparative risk (33.9% TC vs. 50.5% IPC).Conclusions: Cost concerns are a strong determinant of testing. Differences in testing uptake by counseling mode may depend on precounseling distress and risk perceptions.Impact: Cost concerns may contribute to low testing in population-based samples of at-risk cancer survivors. Precounseling psychosocial characteristics should be considered when offering in-person versus telephone counseling. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(12); 1772-80. ©2017 AACR.

Familial breast cancer: Genetic counseling over time, including patients´ expectations and initiators considering the Angelina Jolie effect

Purpose

The German Consortium for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (GC-HBOC) aims for nationwide access to professional, individualized yet structured care for families at high risk. The identification of such families remains key for optimal care. Our study evaluates counselees’ characteristics, referral practices, expectations and motivations in respect to their first genetic consultation. The impact of the Angelina Jolie Effect (AJE) was prospectively assessed.

Methods

All counselees could participate through a questionnaire. Groups were built in respect to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (FT) and before/after AJE.

Results

The 917 (88.5%) counselees (FT: 8.2%) were on average female (97.3%), with a mean age of 44.6, had children (71.9%), higher education (88%), personal (46.4%) or at least one first-degree relative (74.6%) with BC/OC or known BRCA1/2 mutation (11.8%), were in a relationship (76.1%), and living in a village (40.7%). The AJE is associated with significantly fewer cancelations (p = 0.005), more attendance among men (4.2% vs. 0.8%, p = 0.002), and people with familial BRCA1/2 (14.8% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.003). The majority seek information regarding their cancer risk (83%) or relatives’ risk (74.8%), HBOC (69.1%), and surveillance programs for themselves (66.6%) or relatives (60.6%).

Conclusion

Enhanced media awareness of genetic cancer motivates patients, including other patient groups. A higher number of participants, including more men, are attending GC due to the AJE. In terms of the rising complexity of genetic testing, the analysis of patients’ expectations and initiators for GC suggests that there is an urgent need to develop to participate motivation analysis. The factors revealed as impediments to accessing GC-HBOC guide recommendations to optimize access to genetic counseling. Medical educational programs for primary gynecologists and families at risk might be options to reach more participants.

Cancer Risk Information Sharing: The Experience of Individuals Receiving Genetic Counseling for BRCA1/2 Mutations

Genetic counseling and testing for familial cancer is a unique context for the communication of risk information in the family. This study utilized a theoretical framework based on the family systems perspective to understand intrafamilial cancer risk communication patterns in the Ashkenazi Jewish population. Individuals (n = 120) at an elevated risk for BRCA1/2 mutations were included. Change in communication patterns over time was assessed using McNemar tests. Associations with communication patterns were assessed with multivariable logistic regression. Overall, the proportion of participants encouraged by others significantly (p < .001) increased from before to after genetic counseling. A higher proportion of participants were encouraged by female family members compared with male family members. Participants who were older, had no personal history of cancer, and had a higher cancer risk perception were more likely to be encouraged by others for genetic testing. Participant's intent to encourage family members for genetic testing from before counseling to after receipt of genetic test results decreased by 16.7%. Participants who had no personal history of cancer and had informative test results for a BRCA1/2 mutation were more likely to encourage other family members for genetic testing. In addition, qualitative findings suggested that closeness among family members, concern for family, especially future generations, and cognizance about cancer risk facilitate information sharing and encouragement for genetic testing. Our findings indicate that intrafamilial cancer risk communication varies with the structure of family relationships and that genetic counseling can play an important role in improving intrafamilial cancer risk communication.

Impact of Genetic Counseling and Testing on Altruistic Motivations to Test for BRCA1/2: a Longitudinal Study

Despite the importance of altruism in an individual's participation in genetic counseling and testing, little research has explored the change in altruistic motivations to test over time. This study analyzed altruistic motivations to test and change in altruistic motivations after genetic counseling and testing among individuals (N = 120) at elevated risk for BRCA1/2 mutations. The perceived benefits of genetic testing were assessed and utilized in a mixed-methods, repeated measures design at three time points: pre-counseling, counseling and post-genetic testing, along with transcripts of genetic counseling sessions. Qualitative analysis using an immersion/crystallization method resulted in six common perceived benefits of testing: cancer prevention, awareness, family's survival, relief from anxiety, for science, and future planning. Perceived benefits were then coded into three categories according to Hamilton's kin selection theory: altruistic motivation, personal motivation, and motivation for mutual benefit. At pre-counseling, those with a personal cancer history (p = 0.003) and those with one or more children (p = 0.013), were significantly more likely to cite altruistic motivations to test. Altruistic motivations significantly increased post-counseling (p = 0.01) but declined post-testing (p < 0.001). Labov's narrative analysis further elucidated the context of altruistic and personal motivations. The possibility of a positive test result might have led those with personal history of cancer to have altruistic motivations for testing. Genetic counseling may have increased altruistic motivations to help family and may be a prime opportunity to discuss other forms of altruism.

Current directions in behavioral medicine research on genetic testing for disease susceptibility: introduction to the special section

The aim of this special section is to showcase research contributing to our understanding of factors influencing decisions to undergo genetic testing and the impact of the genetic testing process on health-related behaviors of tested individuals. The first two articles report studies investigating factors associated with interest in genetic testing and acceptance of test results (Sherman et al. in J Behav Med doi: 10.1007/s10865-015-9630-9 , 2015; Taber et al. in J Behav Med doi: 10.1007/s10865-015-9642-5 , 2015b). The next two papers address the unique contribution of genetic risk information to understanding risk beyond genetic counseling alone (Heiniger et al. in J Behav Med doi 10.1007/s10865-015-9632-7 , 2015; Taber et al. in J Behav Med doi: 10.1007/s10865-015-9648-z , 2015a). The final three articles investigate the effects of genetic risk information on beliefs about disease control and prevention (Aspinwall et al. in J Behav Med doi: 10.1007/s10865-015-9631-8 , 2015; Kelly et al. in J Behav Med doi 10.1007/s10865-014-9613-2 , 2014; Myers et al. in J Behav Med doi: 10.1007/s10865-015-9626-5 , 2015). Collectively, the special section of papers highlights the diverse ways in which behavioural medicine contributes to our understanding of genetic testing for disease risk, and points to the value of further research to better understand ways in which individuals perceive, interpret and respond to genetic risk information.