Factors Influencing Patient Preferences for Telehealth Cancer Genetic Counseling During the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE: With onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, telehealth became the primary modality for health care appointments. This study examined patient experiences with and preferences for telehealth at a cancer genetic counseling clinic throughout the first 6 months of the pandemic (March-August 2020). METHODS: An anonymous survey assessed patient demographics; usage and prior experience with technology; emotional responses, technical experiences, and satisfaction with the telehealth appointment (via the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale and Visit-Specific Satisfaction Questionnaire); preference for future telehealth; and recommendation of telehealth to others. RESULTS: Among 380 respondents, most were highly satisfied with the telehealth appointment (with 65.6% and 66.4% of participants completing the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale and Visit-Specific Satisfaction Questionnaire, respectively). Multivariable analyses indicated several notable findings. Adjusting for relevant covariates, participants with less education felt significantly more concerned about telehealth than those with highest educational attainment. Participants age 40-69 years were generally more comfortable, relieved, and grateful that their appointment was scheduled as telehealth than were those older than 70 years. Women were marginally more relieved and grateful for telehealth appointments than men. As the pandemic progressed, significantly more participants were highly satisfied with their telehealth appointment and participants trended toward having greater preferences for future telehealth use. Most participants (78.6%) would recommend telehealth to others, although 50.8% preferred future in-person appointments. CONCLUSION: As the pandemic progressed, patients expressed increasing preferences for and satisfaction with telehealth. Service delivery models that incorporate individual patient preferences should be developed with special consideration to factors such as age, sex, and education level.

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of a French Version of the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale (GCSS) as an Outcome Measure of Genetic Counseling for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer

(1) Background: The Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale (GCSS) is a widely used tool to evaluate patient satisfaction. To our knowledge, a validated French-language version of this tool is not yet available. This article reports on the cross-cultural adaptation and validation of a French version of the Genetic Counseling Satisfaction Scale (GCSS) to evaluate genetic counseling services for patient consultation in hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). (2) Methods: The scale was culturally adapted following guidelines from Beaton et al. (2000). Cognitive interviews were conducted to ensure items were understood according to the intended meaning. The internal consistency, floor and ceiling effects, and testing of group differences were assessed using a sample of 172 patients who attended a pretest group genetic counseling session. (3) Results: Participants understood all items according to the intended meaning. The internal consistency was high for the total scale (0.90) and for the corrected item-to-total correlations (varying between 0.62 and 0.78). No floor or ceiling effects were observed. Group difference analyses generally followed expectations. (4) Conclusion: This process generated a French version of the GCSS that is clearly understood by patients, and has psychometric properties adequately in line those reported for its original English version.

Exploring the Cross-Level Impact of Counseling Satisfaction from the Longitudinal Study of Learning Outcomes: A Case Study of Economically Disadvantaged Students

This paper discusses the connotations between the learning outcomes of economically disadvantaged students and time factors. We recruited 1,053 economically disadvantaged students from a private university as participants and collected their mean scores in professional courses for 4 years. After observing the initial learning outcomes and academic growth rates of the students, this study concluded that counseling satisfaction had a cross-level moderating effect on learning outcomes. Additionally, the learning outcomes of economically disadvantaged students in professional courses exhibited decelerating growth with time, whereas cross-level counseling satisfaction had a significant influence and moderating effect on academic growth rate.

The Differences of Counseling Satisfaction Between Counselees With Counseling Style Matches With Their Personalities and Those Who Are Not

This study aimed to determine the differences in counseling satisfaction between counselees who get counseling services in accordance with the characteristics of his personality and get appropriate counseling style and those who do not. The hypothesis proposed in this study was that there was the influence of counselee personality characteristics, counseling style that was in accordance with the satisfaction of counseling.Two hundred and fifty-three men and women who have lived in Semarang for at least 1 year, aged between 18 and 55 years and came from various professions participated in this research. The recruitment of participants was voluntary to participants who were students whereas for non-student participants, there is assignment from the working institutions. The experimental research method was applied by grouping the subjects in the experimental and control groups randomly. A counseling style that matches the characteristics of the participants' personality was given in the experimental group, whereas in the control group it was not. Further comparison of the experimental and control groups was conducted to prove the differences in counseling satisfaction of both groups. Two instruments used in this study were: (1) the Indonesian version of the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R) developed by Costa & McCrae (2) Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8). It was found that in general all participants were satisfied with the counseling service received. T-test analysis was found that there was no difference in counseling satisfaction between experimental and control groups

Addressing Adoption in Counseling: A Study of Adult Adoptees' Counseling Satisfaction

In this mixed-methods study, 118 adult adoptees completed an online survey gathering information on (a) reasons for seeking therapy, (b) preferences for therapists, (c) perception of therapists' degree of emphasis on adoption during therapy, and (d) relationship satisfaction with adoptive and birth family members. The participants also completed the Satisfaction With Therapy and Therapist Scale–Revised (STTS-R), Adoptive Identity Questionnaire (AIQ), and Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (SES). Findings were that the therapists' adoption competence was the most important factor for adoptees in selecting therapists, adoption-related issues were the most common reason adoptees sought therapy, and adoptees reported being more satisfied with therapy if their therapists placed emphasis on adoption regardless of the amount of attention that was focused on adoption.

Abstract 20188: The Effect of Disclosing Genetic Risk for Coronary Heart Disease on Perceived Personal Control and Genetic Counseling Satisfaction: The MI-GENES Study

Background: Perceived personal control (PPC) represents the belief that a person can alter his/her own situation or state. Higher PPC has been associated with increased health-related quality of life and helps facilitate healthy behavioral changes. We investigated whether disclosure of coronary heart disease (CHD) genetic risk influences PPC and genetic counseling satisfaction (GCS) in the myocardial infarction genes (MI-GENES) study, a randomized controlled trial of disclosing genetic risk of CHD. Methods: Participants (40-65 year-old, at intermediate 10-year CHD risk, and not on statins) were randomized to receive estimated 10-year risk of CHD based on their Framingham Risk Score (FRS) or FRS plus a 28 SNP genetic risk score (FRS*GRS). CHD risk was disclosed in each arm by a genetic counselor during a 30-minute scripted session that included a discussion of the impact of family history on CHD risk. For FRS*GRS participants, the genetic counselor also reviewed how their genetic risk score altered their FRS. Each participant then met with a physician to engage in shared-decision making regarding the need for statin therapy. Afterwards, study participants were asked to complete validated surveys to assess PPC and GCS. The 9-item PPC questionnaire was scored 0-9, with higher scores indicating greater control beliefs. The 5-item GCS questionnaire was scored 0-10, with greater scores indicating greater satisfaction with the disclosure session. Results: 207 patients (mean age 58.8±5 years, 46.7% males) were randomized to receive either FRS or FRS*GRS. Patients randomized to receive FRS*GRS had higher PPC compared to FRS although the absolute difference was small (8.85±0.77 vs. 8.54±1.31, P=0.016). Patients randomized to receive FRS*GRS also had a higher GCS score than FRS patients (9.08±2.67 vs. 8.3±3.67, P=0.050]. Conclusions: Disclosure of genetic risk for CHD did not adversely affect PPC or GCS. In fact, patients who received CHD genetic risk information had higher PPC and GCS. Our findings suggest that disclosure of CHD genetic risk is appreciated by patients and may empower them to improve health-related behaviors.