PURPOSE: The aim of the present descriptive study was to investigate the experience of sharing genetic information among cancer genetic counselees and their at-risk relatives. METHODS: In total, 147 cancer genetic counselees and 81 of their at-risk relatives answered to a study specific questionnaire and/or were interviewed. Counselees' communication of genetic information to at-risk relatives was assessed with regard to who they informed, how they felt, and how they perceived their relatives' reactions. In addition, at-risk relatives' experiences of receiving genetic information were studied. RESULTS: Most of the counselees had shared the genetic information received at the counseling session personally with their at-risk relatives. The majority of the counselees (68%) reported positive or neutral feelings about sharing the genetic information with their relatives while 9% stated negative feelings. Counselees mostly interpreted the relatives' reactions to the information as positive or neutral (62% of responses), and in few cases as negative (14% of responses). About half of relatives reported positive or neutral reactions (54%) to the received information, while about one-fifth reported negative reactions (22%). Nevertheless, most relatives were satisfied with the received information and half of the relatives intended to seek genetic counseling themselves. CONCLUSION: Sharing genetic information to at-risk relatives appears to be accomplished without any major difficulties or negative feelings. However, more assistance may be needed to optimize the communication of the genetic information within at-risk families.
PURPOSE: The aim of the present descriptive study was to investigate the experience of sharing genetic information among cancer genetic counselees and their at-risk relatives. METHODS: In total, 147 cancer genetic counselees and 81 of their at-risk relatives answered to a study specific questionnaire and/or were interviewed. Counselees' communication of genetic information to at-risk relatives was assessed with regard to who they informed, how they felt, and how they perceived their relatives' reactions. In addition, at-risk relatives' experiences of receiving genetic information were studied. RESULTS: Most of the counselees had shared the genetic information received at the counseling session personally with their at-risk relatives. The majority of the counselees (68%) reported positive or neutral feelings about sharing the genetic information with their relatives while 9% stated negative feelings. Counselees mostly interpreted the relatives' reactions to the information as positive or neutral (62% of responses), and in few cases as negative (14% of responses). About half of relatives reported positive or neutral reactions (54%) to the received information, while about one-fifth reported negative reactions (22%). Nevertheless, most relatives were satisfied with the received information and half of the relatives intended to seek genetic counseling themselves. CONCLUSION: Sharing genetic information to at-risk relatives appears to be accomplished without any major difficulties or negative feelings. However, more assistance may be needed to optimize the communication of the genetic information within at-risk families.
Authors: Erna Claes; Gerry Evers-Kiebooms; Andrea Boogaerts; Marleen Decruyenaere; Lieve Denayer; Eric Legius Journal: Am J Med Genet A Date: 2003-01-01 Impact factor: 2.802
Authors: Susan Miesfeldt; Wendy F Cohn; Susan M Jones; Mary E Ropka; Jenine C Weinstein Journal: Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet Date: 2003-05-15 Impact factor: 3.908
Authors: Peter James B Abad; Cora A Anonuevo; Sandra Daack-Hirsch; Lorna R Abad; Carmencita D Padilla; Mercy Y Laurino Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2016-11-10 Impact factor: 2.537
Authors: Andreas Andersson; Carolina Hawranek; Anna Öfverholm; Hans Ehrencrona; Kalle Grill; Senada Hajdarevic; Beatrice Melin; Emma Tham; Barbro Numan Hellquist; Anna Rosén Journal: Hered Cancer Clin Pract Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 2.857
Authors: Deborah O Himes; Margaret F Clayton; Gary W Donaldson; Lee Ellington; Saundra S Buys; Anita Y Kinney Journal: J Genet Couns Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 2.537