Genetic counseling supervisor competencies: results of a Delphi study

Genetic counselling supervision: Luxury or necessity? A qualitative study with genetic healthcare professionals in Portugal

In recent years, there has been a significant technological evolution in the field of genetics, leading to an increase in the number of professionals working in medical genetics and, consequently, a tremendous growth in genetic counselling. At the same time, there has been a growing recognition of the parameters on which to base a safe practice, not only regarding the technical skills of the professional but also regarding their counselling skills, including relational and empathy skills and the acknowledgement of the emotional impact that genetic counselling practice can have. However, despite this growing knowledge, there are still significant differences between the various European countries, and one area where this discrepancy is particularly evident is genetic counselling supervision. Thus, if there are countries where genetic counselling supervision is not even known by the professionals, there are others where it is mandatory for practice. This research had as an objective to understand if and how genetic counselling supervision is provided in Portugal, to identify routines, challenges and impacts of genetic counselling that should be explored in a supervision process and comprehend how professionals believe supervision should be conducted to be effective. A total of sixteen medical geneticists from main Portuguese genetic services were present in two online focus groups. None of the participants had access to genetic counselling supervision as a programmed routine and there was a consensus that a service of this kind would be particularly important for the professionals as genetic counselling has frequently challenging and emotional moments. Aspects regarding clinical supervision, the characteristics of the supervisor and the practical aspects of genetic counselling supervision implementation were also mentioned during the discussions. These results highlight the relevancy of the establishment of GC supervision routines and standardized guidelines in our country, as well as a need for evidence-based research focused on its impact at professional and practice level.

An European overview of genetic counselling supervision provision

Genetic testing is becoming more commonplace in general and specialist health care, and should always be accompanied by genetic counselling, according to legislation in many European countries and recommendations by professional bodies. Personal and professional competence is necessary to provide safe and effective genetic counselling. Clinical and counselling supervision of genetics healthcare practitioners plays a key role in quality assurance, providing a safe environment not only for patients but for professionals too. However, in many European countries, genetic counsellors are still an emerging professional group and counselling supervision is not routinely offered and there are no enough evidences on the impact of these insufficiencies. This study aimed to explore the current status of genetic counselling supervision provision across Europe and to ascertain factors that might be relevant for the successful implementation of counselling supervision. A total of 100 practitioners responded to an online survey; respondents were from 18 countries, with the majority working in France (27%) and Spain (17%). Only 34 participants reported having access to genetic counselling supervision. Country of origin, the existence of a regulation system and years of experience were factors identified as relevant, influencing access and characteristics of counselling supervision. Although there is a growing number of genetic counsellors trained at European level, just a few countries have implemented and required as mandatory the access to genetic counselling supervision. Nevertheless, this is essential to ensure a safe and effective genetic counselling and should be regulated at the European genetic healthcare services.

Experiences of United States genetic counseling supervisors regarding race/ethnicity in supervision: A qualitative investigation

While addressing culture in supervision is important, research suggests genetic counseling supervisors are unsure how to discuss it within the supervisory relationship. This study explored the perceptions of genetic counselor supervisors from the United States regarding how their supervisors approached racial/ethnic differences in their supervisory relationships when they were students, effects on those relationships, and subsequent influences on their supervision practices. Nine genetic counselors who self-identified as White/Caucasian, and nine who self-identified as racial/ethnic backgrounds other than White/Caucasian, were purposively recruited to participate in semi-structured phone interviews. Questions explored participant perceptions of how their supervisors approached racial/ethnic differences in supervision, effects on those supervisory relationships, and influences of their experiences as students on their current supervision practice. Thematic analysis revealed four major themes, with most participants agreeing that (1) recognition of race/ethnicity in supervision was limited as a student and in their current supervision practices; (2) supervisors vary in their comfort discussing race/ethnicity; (3) prior student supervision experiences of racial/ethnic differences have limited effects on current supervision practice; and (4) supervisors desire more training in how to approach conversations around race/ethnicity. Further professional discussions about the role of race/ethnicity in the supervisory relationship and training in addressing the cultural context in supervision are needed.

A Delphi study to prioritize genetic counseling outcomes: What matters most

Research on genetic counseling outcomes has examined a range of metrics many that differ in quality and extent of psychometric assessment and in some cases fail to encompass potential benefits of genetic counseling for patients. Although a variety of possible outcomes have been explored, selecting the most important or relevant outcomes and identifying well-validated measures remain challenging. An online, modified Delphi method was used to prioritize genetic counseling outcomes from the viewpoint of individuals from four stakeholder groups - clinical genetic counselors, outcome researchers, genetic counseling training directors, and genetic counseling consumers/advocates. A survey of 181 genetic counseling outcomes were rated based on perceived importance and then sorted and categorized using the Framework for Outcomes of Clinical Communication Services in Genetic Counseling (FOCUS-GC) framework. Three of the FOCUS-GC domains (Process, Patient Care Experience, and Patient Changes) were assessed as most important, while none of the most highly rated outcomes fell into the domains of Patient Health or Family Changes. The majority of outcomes deemed most important by stakeholder groups were within the process domain. When looking at the proportion of outcomes that overlapped with the consumer group, clinical genetic counselors had the highest degree of similarity with consumers when looking at the high relative importance band outcomes (61.1% overlap), followed by training directors (58.3%), and outcome researchers (41.7%). Variability in importance according to stakeholder groups was an important consideration and prioritizing outcomes was challenging given that the majority of outcomes were rated as important. Working to bridge the realities of clinical care and fundamental differences in the viewpoints and priorities of genetic counseling research directions is an area for future exploration.

Genetic counseling graduate training to address religion and spirituality in clinical practice: A qualitative exploration of programs in North America

Patients receiving clinical genetics services often navigate emotionally difficult situations and may utilize their faith as a source of support, an aid in decision-making, or a core coping strategy. Although patients have expressed interest in discussing their religious or spiritual (R/S) beliefs with their genetic counselor (GC), GCs may avoid such conversations because they feel they do not have the necessary skills to discuss R/S beliefs (Reis, Baumiller, Scrivener, Yager, & Warren, 2007). This qualitative study explored how GC programs in North America currently prepare their students to discuss R/S matters with their patients. The aims of this study were to identify (1) the R/S topics genetic counseling programs currently cover in the curriculum, (2) how genetic counseling programs evaluate their students within the R/S topics and activities that are included in the curriculum, and (3) the value or importance placed on R/S training by genetic counseling program directors. Leaders of 12 (36%) of the 33 eligible GC programs at the time of the study participated in a semi-structured phone interview. Their responses were coded using open and axial coding techniques and analyzed using grounded theory. Results revealed that R/S issues are often covered during the psychosocial portions of the curriculum through writing assignments, in class exercises, and role plays. Almost all participating programs include information on pastoral care services, but have little to no training about specific R/S beliefs or the use of spiritual surveys. While participating program directors emphasized that it is critical for students to be prepared to hold conversations about patients' R/S beliefs, the strategies used to prepare students are inconsistent and often not evaluated. We provide suggestions for enriching the R/S training in genetic counseling graduate programs in order to prepare students to facilitate discussions around patients' religion and/or spirituality in genetic counseling sessions.

Supervision in genetic counselor training in North America: A systematic review

Genetic counseling has been a profession for over 40 years, and training programs accredited by the Accreditation Council for Genetic Counseling are required to have students supervised in at least 50 patient-facing cases prior to graduation. However, there is no standardized information or training for supervisors of genetic counseling students. As a first step toward creating formal and standardized supervision training, we undertook a systematic review of the genetic counseling student supervision literature. A formal systematic review was conducted including establishing a research question with inclusion and exclusion criteria, establishing search terms, searching databases, reading/screening abstracts, examining full texts for inclusion, assessing for quality, and finally extracting data with a standardized form to provide the basis of the review. In all, 151 papers were screened, of which 19 and two erratum were found to meet inclusion criteria and pass quality measures. Main themes from these papers were as follows: Training Model, Competencies, Investigation of Techniques, Difficulties in Supervision, and Barriers. In total, 19 papers provided evidence for the way that supervision is currently being performed and suggestions for what needs further investigation to direct supervision training. Recommendations for genetic counseling student supervision include the following: provide a review of training models to supervisors; provide a copy of the supervision competencies to supervisors; use competencies with lowest self-efficacy to inform future supervision trainings; and find ways to support genetic counselors in becoming student supervisors.

Clinical educators' skills and qualities in allied health: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The skills and qualities of effective clinical educators are linked to improved student learning and ultimately patient care; however, within allied health these have not yet been systematically summarised in the literature.

AIMS

To identify and synthesise the skills and qualities of clinical educators in allied health and their effect on student learning and patient care.

METHOD

A systematic search of the literature was conducted across five electronic databases in November 2017. Study identification, data extraction and quality appraisal were performed in duplicate. Qualitative and quantitative data were extracted separately but analysed together using a thematic analysis approach whereby items used in quantitative surveys and themes from qualitative approaches were interpreted together.

RESULTS

Data revealed seven educator skills and qualities: (i) intrinsic and personal attributes of clinical educators; (ii) provision of skillful feedback; (iii) teaching skills; (iv) fostering collaborative learning; (v) understanding expectations; (vi) organisation and planning; and (vii) clinical educators in their professional role. Across all themes was the concept of taking time to perform the clinical educator role. No studies used objective measurements as to how these skills and qualities affect learning or patient care.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Despite much primary evidence of clinical educator skills and qualities, this review presents the first synthesis of this evidence in allied health. There is a need to examine clinical education from new perspectives to develop deeper understanding of how clinical educator qualities and skills influence student learning and patient care.

Effects of Anxiety on Novice Genetic Counseling Students' Experience of Supervised Clinical Rotations

Supervised clinical experiences with patients comprise a critical component of genetic counseling student education. Previous research has found genetic counseling students tend to be more anxiety prone than the general population, and anxiety related to supervision has been found in genetic counseling and related fields. The present study investigated how anxiety affects the experience of supervision for genetic counseling students. Second year genetic counseling students were invited to participate through email invitations distributed via training directors of the 33 programs accredited at the time of the study by the American Board of Genetic Counseling. An initial online survey contained the trait scale of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory to estimate anxiety proneness in this population and an invitation to participate in a 45-minute semi-structured phone interview focusing on students' experiences of supervision during their clinical rotations. High and low trait anxiety groups were created using STAI scores, and the groups' interview responses were compared using consensual qualitative research methodology (CQR; Hill 2012). The high anxiety group was more likely to describe problematic supervisory relationships, appreciate the supervisor's ability to help them when they get stuck in sessions, and feel their anxiety had a negative effect on their performance in general and in supervision. Common themes included supervisors' balancing support and guidance, the importance of feedback, ego-centric responses, and supervisors as focal points. The results of the present study are largely consistent with current literature. Further research findings and research, practice, and training recommendations are provided.

Measuring the Effectiveness of a Genetic Counseling Supervision Training Conference

Genetic counselors who receive formal training report increased confidence and competence in their supervisory roles. The effectiveness of specific formal supervision training has not been assessed previously. A day-long GC supervision conference was designed based on published supervision competencies and was attended by 37 genetic counselors. Linear Mixed Model and post-hoc paired t-test was used to compare Psychotherapy Supervisor Development Scale (PSDS) scores among/between individuals pre and post conference. Generalized Estimating Equation (GEE) model and post-hoc McNemar's test was used to determine if the conference had an effect on GC supervision competencies. PSDS scores were significantly increased 1 week (p < 0.001) and 6 months (p < 0.001) following the conference. For three supervision competencies, attendees were more likely to agree they were able to perform them after the conference than before. These effects remained significant 6 months later. For the three remaining competencies, the majority of supervisors agreed they could perform these before the conference; therefore, no change was found. This exploratory study showed this conference increased the perceived confidence and competence of the supervisors who attended and increased their self-reported ability to perform certain supervision competencies. While still preliminary, this supports the idea that a one day conference on supervision has the potential to impact supervisor development.

Genetics Health Professionals' Views on Quality of Genetic Counseling Service Provision for Presymptomatic Testing in Late-Onset Neurological Diseases in Portugal: Core Components, Specific Challenges and the Need for Assessment Tools

Quality assessment of genetic counseling practice for improving healthcare is a challenge for genetic services worldwide; however, there is scarce literature regarding quality issues in genetic counseling in the context of presymptomatic testing for late-onset neurological diseases (Paneque et al. 2012) The aims of this qualitative study were to: (1) explore the views of professionals' who provide genetic counseling services for presymptomatic testing for late-onset neurological diseases regarding relevant quality indicators for counseling practice; and (2) examine current assessment of such counseling practice for Portuguese genetic services. Quality indicators are a means of measuring either the process or outcomes of patient services, with the aim of evaluating and improving quality of care (Mainz 2003). In this study, we defined quality indicators as measurable outcomes of the counseling process that may reflect good professional practice and desirable end-term effects. We undertook interviews with 18 genetic health professionals (85 % of all genetic counseling professionals involved) from the major genetic services in Portugal. Results indicate that professionals valued some core components of genetic counseling, including providing information and decision-making support, informing the consultand about the genetic counseling protocol, as well as exploring motivations, expectations for test results, consequent anticipated life changes, psychosocial adjustment, and personal and familial experience with the disease. Professionals were not, however, able to clearly elucidate quality indicators for effective practice and some reported they had not reflected on that topic before. Professionals also reported specific challenges in their practice, such as ambiguity of the health/illness status and affirming consultands' autonomy. Results of the study have revealed a lack of knowledge about quality indicators and tools to assess counseling practice. A credible set of quality indicators for presymptomatic testing is required as a foundation for the development of specific tools.