Development and Validation of the Genetic Counseling Self-Efficacy Scale (GCSES)

Exploring Genetic Counselors' Experiences with Indigenous Patient Populations

This study investigates the preparedness of genetic counselors in addressing the potentially unique elements and considerations of Indigenous patients in the United States and Canada. Considering the healthcare disparities Indigenous populations face, particularly in specialty care, this study aims to assess the preparedness of genetic counselors in addressing the unique needs and cultural considerations of Indigenous patients. An online survey was utilized, and a subset of participants was selected to be interviewed. Results reveal genetic counselors felt less competent with Indigenous patients compared to non-Indigenous patients, especially in specific aspects of genetic counseling such as responding to cultural issues or identifying resources. Factors such as increased years of experience and more exposure to Indigenous populations during graduate training correlated with higher self-rated competency. Despite a patient population that is on average 7% Indigenous by self-report, genetic counselors lacked exposure to Indigenous encounters in graduate programs and professional training. These findings underscore the importance of enhancing genetic counseling education and exposure to Indigenous training opportunities such as voluntary events or Indigenous guest speakers to improve cultural competency and address healthcare disparities for Indigenous communities.

Effects of Implicit Racial Bias and Standardized Patient Race on Genetic Counseling Students' Patient-Centered Communication

Clinician racial bias has been associated with less patient-centered communication, but little is known about how it affects trainees' communication. We investigated genetic counseling students' communication during sessions with Black or White standardized patients (SPs) and the extent to which communication was associated with SP race or student scores on the Race Implicit Association Test (IAT). Sixty students conducted a baseline SP session and up to two follow-up sessions. Students were randomly assigned to a different White or Black SP and one of three clinical scenarios for each session. Fifty-six students completed the IAT. Session recordings were coded using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. Linear regression models assessed the effects of IAT score and SP race on a variety of patient-centered communication indicators. Random intercept models assessed the within-student effects of SP race on communication outcomes during the baseline session and in follow-up sessions (n = 138). Students were predominantly White (71%). Forty students (71%) had IAT scores indicating some degree of pro-White implicit preference. Baseline sessions with White relative to Black SPs had higher patient-centeredness scores. Within-participant analyses indicate that students used a higher proportion of back-channels (a facilitative behavior that cues interest and encouragement) and conducted longer sessions with White relative to Black SPs. Students' stronger pro-White IAT scores were associated with using fewer other facilitative statements during sessions with White relative to Black SPs. Different patterns of communication associated with SP race and student IAT scores were found for students than those found in prior studies with experienced clinicians.

Linking genetic counseling communication skills to patient outcomes and experiences using a community-engagement and provider-engagement approach: research protocol for the GC-PRO mixed methods sequential explanatory study

INTRODUCTION

In over 50 years since the genetic counseling (GC) profession began, a systematic study of GC communication skills and patient-reported outcomes in actual sessions across multiple clinical specialties has never been conducted. To optimize GC quality and improve efficiency of care, the field must first be able to comprehensively measure GC skills and determine which skills are most critical to achieving positive patient experiences and outcomes. This study aims to characterise GC communication skills using a novel and pragmatic measure and link variations in communication skills to patient-reported outcomes, across clinical specialties and with patients from diverse backgrounds in the USA. Our community-engagement and provider-engagement approach is crucial to develop recommendations for quality, culturally informed GC care, which are greatly needed to improve GC practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A mixed methods, sequential explanatory design will be used to collect and analyze: audio-recorded GC sessions in cancer, cardiac, and prenatal/reproductive genetic indications; pre-visit and post-visit quantitative surveys capturing patient experiences and outcomes and post-visit qualitative interview data. A novel, practical checklist will measure GC communication skills. Coincidence analysis will identify patterns of GC skills that are consistent with high scores on patient-reported measures. Two-level, multilevel models will be used to evaluate how GC communication skills and other session/patient characteristics predict patient-reported outcomes. Four community advisory boards (CABs) and a genetic counselor advisory board will inform the study design and analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the single Institutional Review Board of the University of Minnesota. This research poses no greater than minimal risk to participants. Results from this study will be shared through national and international conferences and through community-based dissemination as guided by the study's CABs. A lay summary will also be disseminated to all participants.

Development of Competency-based Online Genomic Medicine Training (COGENT)

The fields of genetics and genomics have greatly expanded across medicine through the development of new technologies that have revealed genetic contributions to a wide array of traits and diseases. Thus, the development of widely available educational resources for all healthcare providers is essential to ensure the timely and appropriate utilization of genetics and genomics patient care. In 2020, the National Human Genome Research Institute released a call for new proposals to develop accessible, sustainable online education for health providers. This paper describes the efforts of the six teams awarded to reach the goal of providing genetic and genomic training modules that are broadly available for busy clinicians.

Improving gender-affirming care in genetic counseling: Using educational tools that amplify transgender and/or gender non-binary community voices

Transgender and/or gender non-binary (TGNB) individuals face significant health care disparities, including deficiencies in provider knowledge. To address this knowledge gap for genetic counselors, we developed, implemented, and analyzed an educational intervention on gender-affirming genetic counseling (GC) and care for TGNB patients. In partnership with the TGNB community, we designed a 5-module (length = 146 min ± 94 min) genetic counseling-targeted online learning program focused on gender-affirming care (Amplify). Content included elements of gender-affirming care, core components of gender-inclusive GC sessions, and cancer risk assessment/management. Video testimonials featuring TGNB individuals complemented learning within each module. Educational outcomes measured included comfort working with TGNB patients (n = 2 multiple choice questions (MCQs)), impact of education on knowledge (n = 25 MCQs), and clinical self-efficacy based on the Accreditation Council for Genetic Counseling competencies (n = 35 skills). Participants (n = 40), recruited through state and national GC organizations, completed all modules, and pre- and post-education/self-efficacy assessments. Pre-Amplify, 65% (n = 26/40) of participants endorsed feeling 'somewhat comfortable' working with TGNB patients. The average knowledge score was 77.6% (SD = 11.2%) with the lowest scores related to the gender affirmation process. After Amplify, overall knowledge improvement was statistically significant with an average 16.9% (p < 0.001) increase in score. Pre-Amplify, the average self-efficacy score was 78.4% (SD = 15.8%) with lowest scores seen in statements surrounding information gathering of family and medical histories. Post-Amplify, overall self-efficacy improvement was statistically significant with an average 13.8% (p < 0.001) increase in score. Linear regression did not identify an impact of practice specialty on participants' knowledge gains or self-efficacy. This study shows online modules are an effective form of gender-affirming care education for GCs. This intervention can positively improve the care practicing genetic counselors provide to patients and inform future decision-making about the development of gender-affirming care education for genetic counselors.

Changes to the genetic counseling workforce as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all aspects of our lives. The full impact of the pandemic is still unfolding and will take years to fully understand. This longitudinal study followed a sample of 189 genetic counselors from June to November of 2020, starting with an online retrospective baseline survey of pre-COVID-19 functioning and continuing with a monthly online survey (average retention = 89.2%) to assess changes in self-reported stress, employment status, billing practices, self-efficacy, and their use of telehealth. Participants were recruited from specific states representing geographic diversity with publicly available databases of contact information as well as social media. The sample was largely reflective of the professional demographics reported in the 2020 Professional Status Survey (PSS). Comparisons were made between the PSS, baseline assessment of pre-COVID-19 status, June, and November data. Genetic counselor workload did not significantly change in terms of hours worked from baseline to November, though patients served per week dropped initially before returning to pre-COVID-19 levels. Genetic counselors were increasingly working remotely and supervising students less frequently in November compared to pre-COVID-19 baseline. Approximately 50% of the sample were unable to bill for services throughout the study period, with billing practices not changing during this time. Approximately 40% experienced a negative employment change in June, which dropped to ~10% in November. Personal and family stress levels were elevated during the study period, while financial stress increased from baseline to June it returned to pre-COVID-19 levels by November. Self-efficacy for common genetic counseling skills decreased from baseline to June but returned to baseline levels by November. The results suggest the workforce faced transitions but has rebounded in most areas studied. The pandemic highlighted pre-existing billing issues, and the current billing structures were not able to shift in the face of practice transitions. The long-term implications of the pandemic remain to be seen, but the results indicate returns toward baseline data in most areas with the exceptions of supervision, personal and family stress, and billing.