Telemedicine vs in-person cancer genetic counseling: measuring satisfaction and conducting economic analysis

Datta, Santanu K.; Buchanan, Adam H.; Hollowell, Gail P.; Beresford, Henry F.; Marcom, P. Kelly; Adams, Martha

doi:10.2147/cer.s19179

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, we did not provide the risk of bias assessment table for non-RCTs. [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. The group psychotherapy RCT studied women with emotional distress after primary oncology treatment [5].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 1 includes 16 publications of 10 studies, grouped as either general or genetic counselling [ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 ]. The group psychotherapy RCT studied women with emotional distress after primary oncology treatment [ 5 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two RCTs focused on rural communities and the third was conducted through cancer centres in four large cities [ 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 ]. They all found that virtual care via video or telephone was more cost-effective than in-person counselling.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Virtual Care in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Virtual care in cancer care existed in a limited fashion globally before the COVID-19 pandemic, mostly driven by geographic constraints. The pandemic has required dramatic shifts in health care delivery, including cancer care. We conducted a systematic review of comparative studies evaluating virtual versus in-person care in patients with cancer. Embase, APA PsycInfo, Ovid MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for literature from January 2015 to 6 August 2020. We adhered to PRISMA guidelines and used the modified GRADE approach to evaluate the data. We included 34 full-text publications of 10 randomized controlled trials, 13 non-randomized comparative studies, and 5 ongoing randomized controlled trials. Evidence was divided into studies that provide psychosocial or genetic counselling and those that provide or assess medical and supportive care. The limited data in this review support that in the general field of psychological counselling, virtual or remote counselling can be equivalent to in-person counselling. In the area of genetic counselling, telephone counselling was more convenient and noninferior to usual care for all outcomes (knowledge, decision conflict, cancer distress, perceived stress, genetic counseling satisfaction). There are few data for clinical outcomes and supportive care. Future research should assess the role of virtual care in these areas. Protocol registration: PROSPERO CRD42020202871.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Virtual Care in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the time that funding was sought for the study, there was scant evidence in the literature comparing telephone and televideo genetic counseling. In a previous study that compared videoconferencing to in-person consultations for breast cancer (Datta et al 2011), there was a 5% difference in satisfaction between in-person and televideo genetic counseling. Therefore, we used a 5% difference between groups in patient satisfaction in our sample size calculation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Comparison of Telephone and Televideo Modes for Delivery of Genetic Counseling: a Randomized Trial

Voils

Venne

Weidenbacher

et al. 2017

Journal of Genetic Counseling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Telephone and televideo have yielded equivalent patient satisfaction and psychosocial outcomes when compared to in-person genetic counseling, yet little is known about how they compare to one another. In this randomized controlled trial, veterans received genetic counseling via telephone or traveled to a clinic to participate via encrypted televideo. Knowledge and visit satisfaction were assessed 2 weeks later. Travel time, mileage, and out-of-pocket costs were calculated for videoconferencing. Qualitative interviews were conducted with patients and counselors to assess acceptability. Of the 20 male patients randomized to telephone, 90% received counseling and provided outcomes; of the 18 randomized to televideo, 67% received counseling and 50% provided outcomes. Telephone patients answered a mean of 4.4 of eight questions correctly at baseline and 4.7 at follow-up; televideo means were 5.6 and 6.5, respectively. Satisfaction was 25.2 out of 30 for telephone and 26.9 for televideo. Televideo patients incurred a median of 2.8 h of travel time, 40 roundtrip miles, and $67.29 in costs. Patients and counselors found both modes acceptable for providing education and answering questions. Although patients liked the flexibility of telephone, counselors felt patients missed more appointments and were distracted when using telephone. A noted advantage of videoconferencing was reading body language. Further evaluation of alternative delivery modes is needed.

show abstract

“…Study methodology is described in detail elsewhere (Datta et al, 2011) and summarized below. The study was approved by the Duke University Health System Institutional Review Board.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomized Trial of Telegenetics vs. In‐Person Cancer Genetic Counseling: Cost, Patient Satisfaction and Attendance

Buchanan

Datta

Skinner

et al. 2015

Journal of Genetic Counseling

163

190

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Telegenetics – genetic counseling via live videoconferencing – can improve access to cancer genetic counseling (CGC) in underserved areas, but studies on cancer telegenetics have not applied randomized methodology or assessed cost. We report cost, patient satisfaction and CGC attendance from a randomized trial comparing telegenetics with in-person CGC among individuals referred to CGC in four rural oncology clinics. Participants (n=162) were randomized to receive CGC at their local oncology clinic in-person or via telegenetics. Cost analyses included telegenetics system; mileage; and personnel costs for genetic counselor, IT specialist, and clinic personnel. CGC attendance was tracked via study database. Patient satisfaction was assessed one week post-CGC via telephone survey using validated scales. Total costs were $106 per telegenetics patient and $244 per in-person patient. Patient satisfaction did not differ by group on either satisfaction scale. In-person patients were significantly more likely to attend CGC than telegenetics patients (89% vs. 79%, p=0.03), with bivariate analyses showing an association between lesser computer comfort and lower attendance rate (Chi-square=5.49, p=0.02). Our randomized trial of telegenetics vs. in-person counseling found that telegenetics cost less than in-person counseling, with high satisfaction among those who attended. This study provides support for future randomized trials comparing multiple service delivery models on longer-term psychosocial and behavioral outcomes.

show abstract

Telemedicine vs in-person cancer genetic counseling: measuring satisfaction and conducting economic analysis

Cited by 4 publications

References 48 publications

Virtual Care in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review

Virtual Care in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review

Comparison of Telephone and Televideo Modes for Delivery of Genetic Counseling: a Randomized Trial

Randomized Trial of Telegenetics vs. In‐Person Cancer Genetic Counseling: Cost, Patient Satisfaction and Attendance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About