Literature DB >> 26785833

Online genetic counseling from the providers' perspective: counselors' evaluations and a time and cost analysis.

Ellen Otten1, Erwin Birnie1, Adelita V Ranchor2, Irene M van Langen1.   

Abstract

Telemedicine applications are increasingly being introduced in patient care in various disciplines, including clinical genetics, mainly to increase access to care and to reduce time and costs for patients and professionals. Most telegenetics reports describe applications in large geographical areas, showing positive patients' and professionals' satisfaction. One economic analysis published thus far reported lower costs than in-person care. We hypothesized that telegenetics can also be beneficial from the professional's view in relatively small geographical areas. We performed a pilot study in the Northern Netherlands of 51 home-based online counseling sessions for cardiogenetic and oncogenetic cascade screening, and urgent prenatal counseling. Previously, we showed patient satisfaction, anxiety, and perceived control of online counseling to be comparable to in-person counseling. This study focuses on expectations, satisfaction, and practical evaluations of the involved counselors, and the impact in terms of time and costs. Most counselors expected disadvantages of online counseling for themselves and their patients, mainly concerning insufficient non-verbal communication; few expected advantages for themselves. Afterwards, counselors additionally raised the disadvantage of insufficient verbal communication, and reported frequent technical problems. Their overall mean telemedicine satisfaction itemscore was 3.38 before, and 2.95 afterwards, being afterwards slightly below the minimum level we set for a satisfactory result. We estimated reduced time and costs by online counseling with about 8% and 10-12%, respectively. We showed online genetic counseling to be effective, feasible and cost-efficient, but technical improvements are needed to increase counselors' satisfaction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26785833      PMCID: PMC4989197          DOI: 10.1038/ejhg.2015.283

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet        ISSN: 1018-4813            Impact factor:   4.246


  22 in total

1.  A visitor's guide to effect sizes: statistical significance versus practical (clinical) importance of research findings.

Authors:  Mohammadreza Hojat; Gang Xu
Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.853

2.  The virtual consultation: practitioners' experiences of genetic counseling by videoconferencing in Australia.

Authors:  Elvira Zilliacus; Bettina Meiser; Elizabeth Lobb; Tracey E Dudding; Kristine Barlow-Stewart; Katherine Tucker
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 3.536

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

Authors:  Adam H Buchanan; Santanu K Datta; Celette Sugg Skinner; Gail P Hollowell; Henry F Beresford; Thomas Freeland; Benjamin Rogers; John Boling; P Kelly Marcom; Martha B Adams
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2015-04-03       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Delivery of Internet-based cancer genetic counselling services to patients' homes: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Neal J Meropol; Mary B Daly; Hetal S Vig; Frank J Manion; Sharon L Manne; Carla Mazar; Camara Murphy; Nicholas Solarino; Vadim Zubarev
Journal:  J Telemed Telecare       Date:  2010-11-19       Impact factor: 6.184

5.  Specialist physicians' knowledge and beliefs about telemedicine: a comparison of users and nonusers of the technology.

Authors:  Phoebe Lindsey Barton; Angela G Brega; Patricia A Devore; Keith Mueller; Marsha J Paulich; Natasha R Floersch; Glenn K Goodrich; Sylvia G Talkington; Jeff Bontrager; Bill Grigsby; Carol Hrincevich; Susannah Neal; Jeff L Loker; Tesfa M Araya; Rachael E Bennett; Neil Krohn; Jim Grigsby
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 3.536

6.  What's the harm? Genetic counselor perceptions of adverse effects of genetics service provision by non-genetics professionals.

Authors:  Tracy A Bensend; Patricia McCarthy Veach; Kristin B Niendorf
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-06-12       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  Telemedicine for vulnerable populations.

Authors:  Ronald C Merrell; Charles R Doarn
Journal:  Telemed J E Health       Date:  2014-09-22       Impact factor: 3.536

Review 8.  Patient and provider satisfaction with the use of telemedicine: overview and rationale for cautious enthusiasm.

Authors:  P Whitten; B Love
Journal:  J Postgrad Med       Date:  2005 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 1.476

9.  Development of the Telemedicine Satisfaction Questionnaire to evaluate patient satisfaction with telemedicine: a preliminary study.

Authors:  M P Yip; Anne M Chang; Juliana Chan; Ann E MacKenzie
Journal:  J Telemed Telecare       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 6.184

Review 10.  Interactive telemedicine: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes.

Authors:  Gerd Flodgren; Antoine Rachas; Andrew J Farmer; Marco Inzitari; Sasha Shepperd
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-09-07
View more
  14 in total

Review 1.  Ovarian Cancer Prevention in High-risk Women.

Authors:  Sarah M Temkin; Jennifer Bergstrom; Goli Samimi; Lori Minasian
Journal:  Clin Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 2.190

2.  Implementing a Virtual Health Telemedicine Program in a Community Setting.

Authors:  Scott M Weissman; Kate Zellmer; Nicole Gill; Deborah Wham
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 2.537

3.  Genetic Counselors' Experiences and Interest in Telegenetics and Remote Counseling.

Authors:  Heather A Zierhut; Ian M MacFarlane; Zahra Ahmed; Jill Davies
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  A pilot eConsultation service in Eastern Ontario: bridging clinical genetics and primary care.

Authors:  Priya T Bhola; Clare Liddy; Amir Afkham; Erin Keely; Gail E Graham
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2019-02-18       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 5.  The composition and capacity of the clinical genetics workforce in high-income countries: a scoping review.

Authors:  Nick Dragojlovic; Kennedy Borle; Nicola Kopac; Ursula Ellis; Patricia Birch; Shelin Adam; Jan M Friedman; Amy Nisselle; Alison M Elliott; Larry D Lynd
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 8.822

6.  Pitfalls and challenges in genetic test interpretation: An exploration of genetic professionals experience with interpretation of results.

Authors:  Katherine E Donohue; Catherine Gooch; Alexander Katz; Jessica Wakelee; Anne Slavotinek; Bruce R Korf
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  2021-05       Impact factor: 4.296

7.  Acceptability of Electronic Visits for Return of Research Results in the Mayo Clinic Biobank.

Authors:  Janet E Olson; Euijung Ryu; Kelly J Lyke; Suzette J Bielinski; Erin M Winkler; Matthew A Hathcock; Joshua T Bublitz; Paul Y Takahashi; James R Cerhan
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes       Date:  2018-09-15

8.  Sudden shift to remote genetic counseling during the COVID-19 pandemic: Experiences of genetics professionals in Italy.

Authors:  Daniela Turchetti; Linda Battistuzzi; Benedetta Bertonazzi; Lea Godino
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2021-06-06       Impact factor: 2.717

Review 9.  Cardiovascular Cascade Genetic Testing: Exploring the Role of Direct Contact and Technology.

Authors:  Amy C Sturm
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2016-04-19

10.  Randomized study of remote telehealth genetic services versus usual care in oncology practices without genetic counselors.

Authors:  Cara N Cacioppo; Brian L Egleston; Dominique Fetzer; Colleen Burke Sands; Syeda A Raza; Neeraja Reddy Malleda; Elisabeth McCarty Wood; India Rittenburg; Julianne Childs; David Cho; Martha Hosford; Tina Khair; Jamil Khatri; Lydia Komarnicky; Trina Poretta; Fahd Rahman; Satish Shah; Linda J Patrick-Miller; Susan M Domchek; Angela R Bradbury
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 4.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.