Literature DB >> 11562929

An interactive computer program can effectively educate patients about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility.

M J Green1, B B Biesecker, A M McInerney, D Mauger, N Fost.   

Abstract

As genetic testing for susceptibility to breast cancer becomes more widespread, alternative methods for educating individuals prior to testing will be needed. Our objective was to compare face-to-face education and counseling by a genetic counselor with education by an interactive computer program, assessing the effects of each on knowledge of breast cancer genetics and intent to undergo genetic testing. We used a randomized, controlled trial. Seventy-two self-referred women with a first-degree relative with breast cancer received outpatient education and counseling at the Clinical Center of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Twenty-nine received individualized counseling from a genetic counselor (counseling group), 29 received education from an interactive computer program followed by individualized counseling (computer group), and 14 were controls. Both pre- and postintervention assessment of knowledge about breast cancer genetics and intent to undergo genetic testing were measured. The control group participants correctly answered 74% of the knowledge questions; the counselor group, 92%; and the computer group, 96% (P <.0001). Unadjusted mean knowledge scores were significantly higher in the computer group than the counselor group (P =.048), but they were equivalent when adjusted for demographic differences (P = 0.34). Intent to undergo genetic testing was influenced by the interventions: preintervention, a majority in all groups (69%) indicated that they were likely (definitely and most likely) to undergo testing; after either intervention coupled with counseling, only 44% indicated that they were likely to do so (P =.0002; odds ratio = 2.8, 95% CI = 1.7-4.9). We concluded that a computer program can successfully educate patients about breast cancer susceptibility, and, along with genetic counseling, can influence patients' intentions to undergo genetic testing. Copyright 2001 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11562929     DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.1500

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Med Genet        ISSN: 0148-7299


  46 in total

1.  Direct-to-consumer sales of genetic services on the Internet.

Authors:  Sarah E Gollust; Benjamin S Wilfond; Sara Chandros Hull
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 8.822

2.  Testing communication strategies to convey genomic concepts using virtual reality technology.

Authors:  Kimberly A Kaphingst; Susan Persky; Cade McCall; Christina Lachance; Andrew C Beall; Jim Blascovich
Journal:  J Health Commun       Date:  2009-06

3.  Use and evaluation of an individually tailored website for counselees prior to breast cancer genetic counseling.

Authors:  Akke Albada; Margreet G E M Ausems; Roel Otten; Jozien M Bensing; Sandra van Dulmen
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 4.  A Rapid Systematic Review of Outcomes Studies in Genetic Counseling.

Authors:  Lisa Madlensky; Angela M Trepanier; Deborah Cragun; Barbara Lerner; Kristen M Shannon; Heather Zierhut
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-02-06       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  The role of nonverbal and verbal communication in a multimedia informed consent process.

Authors:  Joseph M Plasek; David S Pieczkiewicz; Andrea N Mahnke; Catherine A McCarty; Justin B Starren; Bonnie L Westra
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 2.342

6.  Community attitudes towards a Jewish community BRCA1/2 testing program.

Authors:  Nicole Cousens; Rajneesh Kaur; Bettina Meiser; Lesley Andrews
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 7.  Communication and technology in genetic counseling for familial cancer.

Authors:  H T Lynch; C Snyder; M Stacey; B Olson; S K Peterson; S Buxbaum; T Shaw; P M Lynch
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 4.438

Review 8.  Interventions to improve patient education regarding multifactorial genetic conditions: a systematic review.

Authors:  Katherine G Meilleur; Marguerite T Littleton-Kearney
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2009-02-15       Impact factor: 2.802

9.  Impact of delivery models on understanding genomic risk for type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  S B Haga; W T Barry; R Mills; L Svetkey; S Suchindran; H F Willard; G S Ginsburg
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2014-02-27       Impact factor: 2.000

10.  Testing the effects of educational strategies on comprehension of a genomic concept using virtual reality technology.

Authors:  Kimberly A Kaphingst; Susan Persky; Cade McCall; Christina Lachance; Johanna Loewenstein; Andrew C Beall; Jim Blascovich
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2009-05-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.