Literature DB >> 8981945

Nondirectiveness in genetic counseling: an empirical study.

S Michie1, F Bron, M Bobrow, T M Marteau.   

Abstract

Nondirectiveness is considered an essential part of genetic counseling, yet there is no generally accepted definition nor data documenting its impact on counselees. This study is an empirical investigation of directiveness, using ratings from transcripts of consultations and comparing these with counselor-reported and counselee-reported directiveness. Rated directiveness was defined as advice, expressed views about or selective reinforcement of counselees' behavior, thoughts, or emotions (advice, evaluation, and reinforcement). Analysis of 131 transcripts revealed a mean of 5.8 advice statements per consultation, 5.8 evaluative statements, and 1.7 reinforcing statements. When asked to describe their counseling style, none of the 11 counselors rated it as "not at all" directive. Half the counselees who faced a decision felt steered by the counselor. Items of rated directiveness showed satisfactory interrater reliability (kappa = .63). Factor analysis revealed that they formed one factor (eigenvalue 1.72). There were no associations either between counselor-reported, counselee-reported, and rated directiveness or between these measures and counselee anxiety and concern, satisfaction with information, or the meeting of counselees' expectations. Rated directiveness was the only measure to be associated with other process measures of the consultation, being associated with longer consultations, more blocks of speech, more social and emotional issues being raised, and fewer concerns being followed up. Advice was more likely to be given to counselees of lower socioeconomic status and to counselees judged by counselors to be highly concerned. Evaluative statements were more likely to be made by counselors who had received counseling training. These results show that genetic counseling was not characterized--by counselors, counselees, or a standardized rating scale--as uniformly nondirective.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 8981945      PMCID: PMC1712566     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hum Genet        ISSN: 0002-9297            Impact factor:   11.025


  17 in total

Review 1.  Prenatal genetic testing and screening: constructing needs and reinforcing inequities.

Authors:  A Lippman
Journal:  Am J Law Med       Date:  1991

2.  Genetics, ethics, and audit.

Authors:  A Clarke
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1990-05-12       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Client reactions to genetic counseling: self-reports of influence.

Authors:  D C Wertz; J R Sorenson
Journal:  Clin Genet       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 4.438

4.  Attitudes of genetic counselors: a multinational survey.

Authors:  D C Wertz; J C Fletcher
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  Information giving in medical care.

Authors:  H Waitzkin
Journal:  J Health Soc Behav       Date:  1985-06

6.  Evaluation of information-guidance genetic counselling.

Authors:  A Czeizel; J Métneki; M Osztovics
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1981-04       Impact factor: 6.318

7.  Effect of a general practitioner's consulting style on patients' satisfaction: a controlled study.

Authors:  R Savage; D Armstrong
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-10-27

8.  The development of a six-item short-form of the state scale of the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI).

Authors:  T M Marteau; H Bekker
Journal:  Br J Clin Psychol       Date:  1992-09

9.  The clarification and assessment of a method of psychotherapy.

Authors:  D P Goldberg; R F Hobson; G P Maguire; F R Margison; T O'Dowd; M Osborn; S Moss
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  1984-06       Impact factor: 9.319

10.  Patient expectations: what do primary care patients want from the GP and how far does meeting expectations affect patient satisfaction?

Authors:  S Williams; J Weinman; J Dale; S Newman
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 2.267

View more
  36 in total

1.  Shared decision making and non-directiveness in genetic counselling.

Authors:  G Elwyn; J Gray; A Clarke
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 6.318

2.  The role of non-directiveness in genetic counseling.

Authors:  Fuat S Oduncu
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2002

3.  Psychological aspects of genetic counseling: XII. More on counseling skills.

Authors:  Seymour Kessler
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  "Respect for autonomy" in genetic counseling: an analysis and a proposal.

Authors:  Mary Terrell White
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 2.537

5.  Eugenics and nondirectiveness in genetic counseling.

Authors:  Robert G Resta
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 2.537

6.  Is informed choice in genetic testing a different breed of informed decision-making? A discussion paper.

Authors:  J Emery
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.377

7.  Genetic counselling: the psychological impact of meeting patients' expectations.

Authors:  S Michie; T M Marteau; M Bobrow
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 6.318

8.  Assisted reproduction: managing an unruly technology.

Authors:  Mairi Levitt
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2004-03

9.  The psychological dimension of informed consent: dissonance processes in genetic testing.

Authors:  Sonja Grover
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 2.537

10.  Attitudes of health care trainees about genetics and disability: issues of access, health care communication, and decision making.

Authors:  Kelly E Ormond; Carol J Gill; Patrick Semik; Kristi L Kirschner
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 2.537

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.