Ownership of uncertainty: healthcare professionals counseling and treating women from hereditary breast and ovarian cancer families who receive an inconclusive BRCA1/2 genetic test result

Moderators uncertainty tolerance (UT) in healthcare: a systematic review

Uncertainty tolerance (UT) is integral to healthcare. Providers' responses to medical uncertainty has ramifications on the healthcare system, the healthcare provider and the patient. Understanding healthcare providers' UT, is important for improving patient-care outcomes. Understanding whether and to what extent it is possible to modulate individuals' perceptions and responses to medical uncertainty, can provide insights into mechanisms for support for training and education. The objectives of this review were to further characterize moderators of healthcare UT and explore moderator influences on the perceptions and responses to uncertainty experienced by healthcare professionals. Framework analysis of qualitative primary literature was conducted on 17 articles, focusing on the impacts of UT on healthcare providers. Three domains of moderators were identified and characterized relating to the healthcare provider's personal attributes, patient-derived uncertainty and the healthcare system. These domains were further categorized into themes and subthemes. Results suggest these moderators influence perceptions and responses to healthcare uncertainty across a spectrum ranging from positive to negative to uncertain. In this way, UT could be a state-based construct within healthcare settings and is contextually determined. Our findings further characterize the integrative model of uncertainty tolerance (IMUT) (Hillen Social Science and Medicine 180, 62-75, 2017) and provide evidence for the relationship between moderators and their influences on cognitive, emotional and behavioral responses to uncertainty. These findings provide a foundation for understanding the complex nature of the UT construct, add to theory development, and provide groundwork for future research exploring appropriate support for training and education in healthcare fields.

Diagnostic uncertainties, ethical tensions, and accounts of role responsibilities in genetic counseling communication

Diagnostic uncertainties are intricately associated with genomic testing-especially concerning new technologies such as exome sequencing-with test results being either inconclusive or generating secondary findings or showing variants of uncertain significance. In the process of genetic counseling, diagnostic uncertainties have to be managed even when test results for an individual client are either positive or negative because of differential implications for family members. Previous studies have investigated diagnostic uncertainties in relation to clients wanting to know or not know the test results; here, we extend this line of research by addressing how genetic counselors and clients account for the management of diagnostic uncertainties vis-à-vis the attendant ethical tensions in the complex communicative environment in the clinic setting. Our dataset from the Norwegian context is longitudinal, consisting of ten audio-recorded pre-test genetic counseling sessions. It involves one extended family with a high burden of colorectal cancer. Through theme-oriented discourse analysis, we demonstrate how diagnostic uncertainties give rise to tensions concerning risks and benefits of knowing in both professional and familial spheres, which then map onto accounts of various role responsibilities. For instance, in looking for certainty via advanced genomic testing to reduce diagnostic uncertainty for clients, genetic counselors are confronted with tensions regarding what can be communicated and made known because of their role responsibilities toward what may be regarded as scientific others and clinical others. Likewise, clients are faced with tensions concerning wanting to know/not know, which invokes various familial others and may align or not align with genetic counselors' preferences, especially relating to management of diagnostic uncertainties and secondary findings.

Understanding variants of uncertain significance in the era of multigene panels: Through the eyes of the patient

Variants of uncertain significance (VUSs) are often disclosed to patients despite ambiguous association with disease risk and lack of clinical actionability. It is important to understand how patients understand a VUS result, but few studies have assessed this. Our qualitative study explored patient recall, reaction to, and interpretation of a VUS in the context of multigene panels. We conducted 11 semi-structured phone interviews with adults who had a VUS identified on multigene panel testing in a hereditary oncology clinic, with questions focusing on the VUS result, personal and family history, and motivations for and expectations of genetic testing. Transcripts were coded iteratively, using both deductive and inductive codes. Overall, participants usually recalled that they had a VUS, despite variation in the vocabulary used. Participants responded both emotionally and intellectually to receiving information about having a VUS, which was often a result of their expectations and motivations prior to testing. Overall, participants understood the lack of clinical significance of a VUS, yet often interpreted the etiologic significance of a VUS within the context of the personal and family history. Our study provides insight into a process by which patients translate uncertain genetic testing results into a construct that fits within their current belief framework and which may be facilitated by a genetic counselor.

A revised model of uncertainty in complex healthcare settings: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty is a ubiquitous and dynamic presence throughout healthcare systems and encounters, affecting the quality and safety of care. Although previous research has attempted to categorize varieties of uncertainty, it is not clear if these classifications are applicable across various healthcare settings.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this review was to examine the applicability of the issues of uncertainty delineated in an established taxonomy across diverse healthcare domains, professions, and countries and to consider the complexity of these issues.

METHODS

Drawing on empirical research from three databases, we conducted a scoping review of the literature to identify types of uncertainty experienced by healthcare professionals. A framework synthesis design was employed to review and synthesize the literature across multiple healthcare settings.

RESULTS

The search identified 2285 articles, of which 94 met the inclusion criteria. Findings from included studies suggested professional uncertainty in healthcare is complex and pervasive. On the basis of our inability to categorize some studies in the issues of uncertainty outlined in the existing taxonomy, we proposed a revised model of uncertainty for healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

The revised model of uncertainty, the model of uncertainty in complex healthcare settings (MUCH-S), is applicable to various healthcare ecosystems and proposes a reflexive archetype that recognizes different issues of uncertainty while establishing that these are often interrelated in healthcare systems. This review offers healthcare professionals greater levels of understanding of this complex phenomenon and may support more informed and reflective decision-making, assisting them to better navigate uncertainties experienced in healthcare workplaces.

An exploration of genetic counselors' needs and experiences with prenatal chromosomal microarray testing

Because of the higher yield over traditional chromosomal analysis, chromosomal microarray analysis (CMA) is being used increasingly in prenatal diagnosis. Unfortunately, the clinical implication of many copy number variants found on prenatal CMA is uncertain, complicating genetic counseling. Recognizing that uncertain results will be encountered frequently as more of the genome is assayed prenatally, we set out to understand the experiences and needs of genetic counselors when counseling patients about uncertain prenatal microarray results, their comfort with various aspects of prenatal genetic counseling, and their interest in additional education and training about prenatal microarray testing. We first interviewed 10 genetic counselors about their experiences of providing pre- and post-test genetic counseling about prenatal CMA. Based on the findings from the counselor interviews, we developed items for a survey to assess the prevalence of genetic counselors' attitudes towards, experience and comfort with, and educational needs regarding prenatal CMA. Based on surveys completed by 193 prenatal genetic counselors, we found that when there is an uncertain CMA result, only 59% would be comfortable providing genetic counseling and only 43% would be comfortable helping a patient make a decision about pregnancy termination. Being less comfortable was associated with seeing fewer patients having prenatal CMA testing. Respondents expressed a high degree of interest in additional education about prenatal CMA and counseling about uncertain results. Further genetic counselor education and training aimed at improving counselors' personal comfort with uncertain results and communicating about them with patients is needed.

"Nothing is absolute in life": understanding uncertainty in the context of psychiatric genetic counseling from the perspective of those with serious mental illness

No genetic tests are currently clinically available for serious mental illnesses such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Rather, the full spectrum of genetic variants that confer susceptibility remain unknown, and estimates of probability of condition recurrence typically have the form of ranges rather than single absolute numbers. Genetic counselors have been shown to feel that the information that can be provided for patients with serious mental illness could be more confusing than helpful. However, how those with serious mental illness perceive this uncertainty remains unknown. So, to investigate this, individuals with serious mental illness participated in a psychiatric genetic counseling (GC) session and responded to a single open ended question about their reactions towards the uncertainty that they encountered in their GC session immediately and one month post-counseling (from which themes were identified), and completed the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale immediately post-session (descriptive statistics applied). While some of the 37 participants were disappointed with the uncertainty, twice as many were unconcerned. Overall, responses from immediately and one month after GC were very similar; participants were very satisfied with, and found value in GC despite uncertainty, and four approaches to coping with uncertainty emerged. Ultimately, these findings offer insight into providing GC for those with serious mental illness, and potentially could be applied to other areas of GC where uncertainty lies, with downstream impact on GC practice and future research.