Nan M Solomons1, Amanda E Lamb2, Frances L Lucas3, Eileen F McDonald4, Susan Miesfeldt2. 1. 1 Health Informatics Programs, College of Graduate and Professional Studies, University of New England , Portland, Maine. 2. 2 Maine Medical Center Cancer Institute , Maine Medical Center, Scarborough, Maine. 3. 3 Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Maine Medical Center Research Institute , Maine Medical Center, Portland, Maine. 4. 4 The Center for Genetics and Prevention, Dana Farber Cancer Institute , Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Telecommunication models promise to improve access to cancer genetic counseling. Little is known about their impact among the geographically underserved. This work examined knowledge and emotional outcomes and attitudes/beliefs regarding cancer telegenetic services (via live-interactive videoconferencing) in Maine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cancer telegenetic patients seen at two remote sites and control (in-person) patients responded to pre-/postsurveys assessing care impact on hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) knowledge and emotional health, ease of access to services, and telegenetics satisfaction/acceptability. RESULTS: 158/174 (90%) participants returned pre- and immediate postcounseling surveys (90 remote and 68 in-person). Fewer returned 1-month postsurveys. Remote patients were older with lower education levels, more likely to live in rural counties and to have cancer histories. The two groups were matched relative to gender, race, and health insurance status. HBOC knowledge improved equally in both groups pre- versus immediately postcounseling and was maintained at 1 month in both groups. Decreased anxiety was evident postcounseling with no significant difference between groups. Depression improved significantly in remote patients immediately postcounseling; 1-month depression measures were lower in both groups. The availability of telegenetics eased transportation needs/work absences, and patients reported satisfaction with telecommunication quality. Despite overall acceptance of telegenetics, 32% of remote patients noted preference for in-person care. CONCLUSIONS: There were few differences in HBOC knowledge and emotional outcomes comparing traditional in-person cancer genetic services with telegenetics, and satisfaction with/acceptance of this model was high. These data relate to scalability of cancer telegenetics in rural regions regionally and nationally.
BACKGROUND: Telecommunication models promise to improve access to cancer genetic counseling. Little is known about their impact among the geographically underserved. This work examined knowledge and emotional outcomes and attitudes/beliefs regarding cancer telegenetic services (via live-interactive videoconferencing) in Maine. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Cancer telegeneticpatients seen at two remote sites and control (in-person) patients responded to pre-/postsurveys assessing care impact on hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) knowledge and emotional health, ease of access to services, and telegenetics satisfaction/acceptability. RESULTS: 158/174 (90%) participants returned pre- and immediate postcounseling surveys (90 remote and 68 in-person). Fewer returned 1-month postsurveys. Remote patients were older with lower education levels, more likely to live in rural counties and to have cancer histories. The two groups were matched relative to gender, race, and health insurance status. HBOC knowledge improved equally in both groups pre- versus immediately postcounseling and was maintained at 1 month in both groups. Decreased anxiety was evident postcounseling with no significant difference between groups. Depression improved significantly in remote patients immediately postcounseling; 1-month depression measures were lower in both groups. The availability of telegenetics eased transportation needs/work absences, and patients reported satisfaction with telecommunication quality. Despite overall acceptance of telegenetics, 32% of remote patients noted preference for in-person care. CONCLUSIONS: There were few differences in HBOC knowledge and emotional outcomes comparing traditional in-personcancer genetic services with telegenetics, and satisfaction with/acceptance of this model was high. These data relate to scalability of cancer telegenetics in rural regions regionally and nationally.
Entities:
Keywords:
cancer genetic counseling; e-Health; m-Health; telehealth; telemedicine
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
Authors: L G Bluman; B K Rimer; D A Berry; N Borstelmann; J D Iglehart; K Regan; J Schildkraut; E P Winer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Hetal S Vig; Joanne Armstrong; Brian L Egleston; Carla Mazar; Michele Toscano; Angela R Bradbury; Mary B Daly; Neal J Meropol Journal: Genet Test Mol Biomarkers Date: 2009-12
Authors: Katie L Lewis; Kendall L Umstead; Jennifer J Johnston; Ilana M Miller; Lydia J Thompson; Kristen P Fishler; Leslie G Biesecker; Barbara B Biesecker Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2018-03-08 Impact factor: 11.025
Authors: Kelsey E Breen; Malwina Tuman; Corinna E Bertelsen; Margaret Sheehan; David Wylie; Megan Harlan Fleischut; Kenneth Offit; Zsofia K Stadler; Erin E Salo-Mullen; Jada G Hamilton Journal: JCO Oncol Pract Date: 2021-10-15
Authors: Jeanna M McCuaig; Susan Randall Armel; Melanie Care; Alexandra Volenik; Raymond H Kim; Kelly A Metcalfe Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2018-11-13 Impact factor: 6.639
Authors: Li Sun; Adam Brentnall; Shreeya Patel; Diana S M Buist; Erin J A Bowles; D Gareth R Evans; Diana Eccles; John Hopper; Shuai Li; Melissa Southey; Stephen Duffy; Jack Cuzick; Isabel Dos Santos Silva; Alec Miners; Zia Sadique; Li Yang; Rosa Legood; Ranjit Manchanda Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2019-10-03 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Katherine L Bergstrom; Tehilla E Brander; Kelsey E Breen; Hetanshi Naik Journal: Am J Med Genet C Semin Med Genet Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 3.359
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