Patient outcomes associated with group and individual genetic counseling formats

Rothwell, Erin; Kohlmann, Wendy; Jasperson, Kory; Gammon, Amanda; Wong, Bob; Kinney, Anita Y.

doi:10.1007/s10689-011-9486-2

Cited by 23 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, these outcomes are comparable to previous reports on PPC and STAI outcomes for in-person oncogenetic counselling. 1,13,[22][23][24][25] The mean anxiety level of online patients both before and after counselling was significantly lower than of controls. This might be an indication that patients who choose for online counselling are in general less anxious in nature than patients who choose for in-person counselling.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Telegenetics use in presymptomatic genetic counselling: patient evaluations on satisfaction and quality of care

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, online counselling has been introduced in clinical genetics to increase patients' access to care and to reduce time and cost for both patients and professionals. Most telegenetics reports so far evaluated online oncogenetic counselling at remote health centres in regions with large travelling distances, generally showing positive patient outcomes. We think online counselling -including the use of supportive tools that are also available during in-person counselling -of presymptomatic patients in their homes can also be feasible and valuable for patients in relatively small regions. We performed a single-centre pilot study of online genetic counselling for 57 patients who were presymptomatic cardiogenetic (n = 17), presymptomatic oncogenetic (n = 34) and prenatal (3 couples). One-third of presymptomatic patients we approached consented to online counselling. Patient evaluations of practical aspects, satisfaction and psychological outcomes were assessed and compared with a matched control group. Patients managed to fulfil the preparations, were significantly more satisfied with their counsellor and counselling session than controls and were satisfied with the online counselling more than they expected to be beforehand. Psychological outcomes (decreased anxiety and increased control) did not differ with control patients. Technical problems occurred in almost half of online sessions. Nonetheless, online counselling in patients' homes proved to be feasible and was appreciated by a substantial part of presymptomatic patients at our genetics centre in the Netherlands. Based on these outcomes, we conclude online counselling can be a valuable addition to existing counselling options in regular patient care. European Journal of Human Genetics (2016) 24, 513-520; doi:10.1038/ejhg.2015.164; published online 15 July 2015 INTRODUCTIONTelemedicine applications have recently been introduced in clinical genetics (generally referred to as telegenetics), meaning the remote counselling or evaluation of patients in real time by video and audio applications. The underlying reasons for its introduction concern increased access and efficiency of care.Currently, genetics departments are facing efficiency measures, cost reductions and shortage of clinical genetic professionals. Simultaneously, the widespread introduction of next-generation sequencing is increasing the number of requests for and yield of genetic counselling and testing. Literature reports suggest that telegenetic care can be useful, patient-friendly, effective and psychologically acceptable for various indications in the light of economic and personnel scarcity on the one hand, and increasing awareness and counselling requests from patients spread over a large geographical area on the other hand. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] So far, almost all reports of telegenetics programmes described counselling between professionals at a central clinic and patients at regional clinics, with a genetic counsellor present, in regions with large travelling distances. [1][2][3][...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Telegenetics use in presymptomatic genetic counselling: patient evaluations on satisfaction and quality of care

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The list of models was generated based on 1 ½day discussion on service delivery that took place between nine genetic counselors (including the two authors) from various practice settings and five genetic counselors in leadership positions at Myriad Genetics Laboratories (Allain et al 2010). A review of the medical literature was also conducted to identify additional service delivery models and to help develop clear definitions of each model (Baumanis et al 2009;Calzone et al 2005;Chen et al 2002;Cohen et al 2009;IOM 2009;Jenkins et al 2007;Peshkin et al 2008;Ridge et al 2009;Rothwell et al 2012;Shanley et al 2007;Wham et al 2010). Participants were asked to indicate which of these models they use and what proportion of their patient care time (0-100 %) they spend using each one.…”

Section: Instrumentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Outside of the traditional, faceto-face model, the other most commonly described service delivery models for cancer genetic services are telephone and group counseling models (Baumanis et al 2009;Calzone et al 2005;Chen et al 2002;Jenkins et al 2007;Peshkin et al 2008;Ridge et al 2009;Rothwell et al 2012;Shanley et al 2007). Outside of the traditional, faceto-face model, the other most commonly described service delivery models for cancer genetic services are telephone and group counseling models (Baumanis et al 2009;Calzone et al 2005;Chen et al 2002;Jenkins et al 2007;Peshkin et al 2008;Ridge et al 2009;Rothwell et al 2012;Shanley et al 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2005, Calzone et al randomly assigned 142 individuals at risk for having BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations to either a group or individual pre-test education/counseling session (Calzone et al 2005). A more recent study assessing the feasibility and acceptability of group counseling for HBOC also concluded that when given the option, most clients preferred individual counseling, but among those who elected to undergo group counseling there were no differences in outcomes on psychological sequelae or satisfaction (Rothwell et al 2012). No differences in knowledge, IES scores, or satisfaction were found between the two groups.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many genetic service providers have already begun to proactively explore and evaluate alternative service delivery models for enhancing access. Outside of the traditional, faceto-face model, the other most commonly described service delivery models for cancer genetic services are telephone and group counseling models (Baumanis et al 2009;Calzone et al 2005;Chen et al 2002;Jenkins et al 2007;Peshkin et al 2008;Ridge et al 2009;Rothwell et al 2012;Shanley et al 2007). Telemedicine and web-based approaches have also been described as methods for improving access, especially for rural populations (Hilgart et al 2012a, b;IOM 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Models of Service Delivery for Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment and Counseling

Trepanier

Allain

2013

Journal of Genetic Counseling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasing awareness of and the potentially concomitant increasing demand for cancer genetic services is driving the need to explore more efficient models of service delivery. The aims of this study were to determine which service delivery models are most commonly used by genetic counselors, assess how often they are used, compare the efficiency of each model as well as impact on access to services, and investigate the perceived benefits and barriers of each. Full members of the NSGC Familial Cancer Special Interest Group who subscribe to its listserv were invited to participate in a web-based survey. Eligible respondents were asked which of ten defined service delivery models they use and specific questions related to aspects of model use. One-hundred ninety-two of the approximately 450 members of the listserv responded (42.7%); 177 (92.2%) had provided clinical service in the last year and were eligible to complete all sections of the survey. The four direct care models most commonly used were the (traditional) face-to-face pre- and post-test model (92.2%), the face-to-face pretest without face-to-face post-test model (86.5%), the post-test counseling only for complex results model (36.2%), and the post test counseling for all results model (18.3%). Those using the face-to-face pretest only, post-test all, and post-test complex models reported seeing more new patients than when they used the traditional model and these differences were statistically significantly. There were no significant differences in appointment wait times or distances traveled by patients when comparing use of the traditional model to the other three models. Respondents recognize that a benefit of using alternative service delivery models is increased access to services; however, some are concerned that this may affect quality of care.

show abstract

Adapting Genetic Counseling Practice to Different Models of Service Delivery

Trepanier

Allain

2020

Genetic Counseling Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient outcomes associated with group and individual genetic counseling formats

Cited by 23 publications

References 50 publications

Telegenetics use in presymptomatic genetic counselling: patient evaluations on satisfaction and quality of care

Telegenetics use in presymptomatic genetic counselling: patient evaluations on satisfaction and quality of care

Models of Service Delivery for Cancer Genetic Risk Assessment and Counseling

Adapting Genetic Counseling Practice to Different Models of Service Delivery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About