Publications by authors named "Angela M Trepanier"

10 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Genetic counselor workflow study: The times are they a-changin'?

J Genet Couns 2019 02 10;28(1):130-140. Epub 2018 Dec 10.

Genetic Counseling Program, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan.

Genetic services have historically been time and labor intensive. Little information is known about the proportion of time genetic counselors (GCs) spend face-to-face with patients in comparison to the time spent on patient-related activities (PRA). We aimed to perform a real-time workflow study of GCs representing multiple clinics and specialties. We developed an electronic collection tool formatted in 15-min increments for real-time documentation of how the GC spent his/her time throughout the workday for one full week, based on a defined task list. Participants were Michigan GCs recruited via email solicitation. Sixteen of an estimated 70 patient-facing GCs (23%) representing prenatal, cancer, adult, and pediatric genetics took part by completing a demographic survey and the workflow study. The GCs reported spending approximately 20% of their time face-to-face with patients, 64% on PRA including case preparation, follow-up, and administrative tasks, and 16% on tasks unrelated to direct patient care. They saw a mean of 10 patients/week with a mean session length of 47 min. Approximately 3 hr of PRA were performed for the 0.78 hr (47 min) of face-to-face time with a patient. The most time-consuming task in the PRA category was letter writing. Identifying strategies to reduce the amount of time spent on PRA could increase the amount of available time GCs have to spend on providing face-to-face services and subsequently, the number of patients seen. Such efforts are critical to help meet the growing demand for genetic counseling services.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.1041DOI Listing
February 2019

Delivery Of Cascade Screening For Hereditary Conditions: A Scoping Review Of The Literature.

Health Aff (Millwood) 2018 05;37(5):801-808

Heather Hampel is associate director of the Division of Human Genetics and of biospecimen research, and a professor of internal medicine, all at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, in Columbus.

Cascade screening is the process of contacting relatives of people who have been diagnosed with certain hereditary conditions. Its purpose is to identify, inform, and manage those who are also at risk. We conducted a scoping review to obtain a broad overview of cascade screening interventions, facilitators and barriers to their use, relevant policy considerations, and future research needs. We searched for relevant peer-reviewed literature in the period 1990-2017 and reviewed 122 studies. Finally, we described 45 statutes and regulations related to the use and release of genetic information across the fifty states. We sought standardized best practices for optimizing cascade screening across various geographic and policy contexts, but we found none. Studies in which trained providers contacted relatives directly, rather than through probands (index patients), showed greater cascade screening uptake; however, policies in some states might limit this approach. Major barriers to cascade screening delivery include suboptimal communication between the proband and family and geographic barriers to obtaining genetic services. Few US studies examined interventions for cascade screening or used rigorous study designs such as randomized controlled trials. Moving forward, there remains an urgent need to conduct rigorous intervention studies on cascade screening in diverse US populations, while accounting for state policy considerations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1630DOI Listing
May 2018

Assessment of Current Genetic Counselor Practices in Post-Visit Written Communications to Patients.

J Genet Couns 2018 06 12;27(3):681-688. Epub 2017 Oct 12.

Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University School of Medicine, 540 E. Canfield St., 2375 Scott Hall, Detroit, MI, 48201, USA.

Providing patients with post-visit written communication (PVWC) is a long-standing component of genetic counseling. However the depiction of this practice in today's clinical landscape is limited. To better describe this practice, we surveyed practicing clinical genetic counselors to ask if they send post-visit communications to patients and if so, what are the types, the average length, and the average time spent writing. They were also asked the perceived purpose of providing PVWC, if/how the practice has changed over time, and factors influencing the practice. Eighty three percent (233/280) of participants reported sending patients PVWC. Of those, 93% sent at least one communication written in patient-friendly language. The type of communication varied by specialty. Prenatal genetic counselors were less likely to send patient-specific letters and hybrid letters (defined as letters with content intended for both a physician and a patient) than those in cancer genetics (p = 0.010, p = 0.001, respectively) or pediatric genetics (p = 0.001, p = 0.004, respectively). Prenatal genetic counselors spent less time on average writing post-visit communications (19.0 min) relative to those in cancer and pediatric genetics (30.6 min, p = 0.027 and 37.7 min, p = 0.001, respectively). The most commonly cited purpose for sending PVWC was to provide patients a formal account of what happened during the appointment. These data suggest PWVC are still regularly sent to patients but the practice is variable and is influenced by numerous factors including specialty, years of experience, and time constraints.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10897-017-0163-yDOI Listing
June 2018

A Rapid Systematic Review of Outcomes Studies in Genetic Counseling.

J Genet Couns 2017 Jun 6;26(3):361-378. Epub 2017 Feb 6.

Department of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota - Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

As healthcare reimbursement is increasingly tied to value-of-service, it is critical for the genetic counselor (GC) profession to demonstrate the value added by GCs through outcomes research. We conducted a rapid systematic literature review to identify outcomes of genetic counseling. Web of Science (including PubMed) and CINAHL databases were systematically searched to identify articles meeting the following criteria: 1) measures were assessed before and after genetic counseling (pre-post design) or comparisons were made between a GC group vs. a non-GC group (comparative cohort design); 2) genetic counseling outcomes could be assessed independently of genetic testing outcomes, and 3) genetic counseling was conducted by masters-level genetic counselors, or non-physician providers. Twenty-three papers met the inclusion criteria. The majority of studies were in the cancer genetic setting and the most commonly measured outcomes included knowledge, anxiety or distress, satisfaction, perceived risk, genetic testing (intentions or receipt), health behaviors, and decisional conflict. Results suggest that genetic counseling can lead to increased knowledge, perceived personal control, positive health behaviors, and improved risk perception accuracy as well as decreases in anxiety, cancer-related worry, and decisional conflict. However, further studies are needed to evaluate a wider array of outcomes in more diverse genetic counseling settings.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10897-017-0067-xDOI Listing
June 2017

Public Health Approaches and Barriers to Educating Providers about Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Syndrome.

Healthcare (Basel) 2016 Mar 11;4(1). Epub 2016 Mar 11.

Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, 201 Townsend, Lansing, MI 48909, USA.

The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services implemented and evaluated two initiatives designed to enhance provider knowledge of patients appropriate for breast and/or ovarian cancer genetic risk assessment and hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) syndrome testing. The first initiative targeted select providers who had diagnosed patients meeting HBOC risk criteria. Specifically, the initiative used 2008-2009 state cancer registry data to identify all providers who had diagnosed breast cancers in women ≤50 years of age, male breast cancers, and ovarian cancers in four health systems with newly established cancer genetics clinics. Using a method coined bidirectional reporting (BDR), reports highlighting how many of these cases each provider had seen were generated and mailed. Reports on 475 cancers (9.5% of the 5005 cases statewide meeting criteria) were sent to 69 providers with information about how and why to refer such patients for genetic counseling. Providers who received a report were contacted to assess whether the reports increased awareness or resulted in action (genetic counseling/referral). Based on the few responses received, despite multiple attempts to contact, and attrition rate, it is not possible to ascertain the impact of this initiative on providers. However the project resulted in the MDHHS identifying which providers see the largest proportion of at-risk patients, creating an opportunity to target those providers with HBOC education efforts. The second initiative involved creating and broadly disseminating an online, interactive case-based educational module to increase awareness and referral decisions for HBOC using high- and low-risk patient scenarios. A total of 1835 unique users accessed the module in a one year. Collectively the users viewed topic pages 2724 times and the interactive case studies 1369 times. Point of care tools (fact sheets) were viewed 1624 times and downloaded 764 times. Satisfaction among the subset of users applying for continuing medical education credit was high. The online educational module had a much broader reach than the bidirectional reporting initiative but to a self-selected audience. Combining targeted and broad-based provider education efforts may be a better way to increase HBOC awareness in the target audience, starting with those providers seeing the largest proportion of patients at risk.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare4010019DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4934553PMC
March 2016

A Comparison of Telephone Genetic Counseling and In-Person Genetic Counseling from the Genetic Counselor's Perspective.

J Genet Couns 2016 Feb 6;25(1):112-26. Epub 2015 Jun 6.

Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University School of Medicine, 540 E. Canfield, 2375 Scott Hall, Detroit, MI, USA.

Growing demand for and limited geographic access to genetic counseling services is increasing the need for alternative service delivery models (SDM) like telephone genetic counseling (TGC). Little research has been done on genetic counselors' perspectives of the practice of TGC. We created an anonymous online survey to assess whether telephone genetic counselors believed the tasks identified in the ABGC (American Board of Genetic Counseling) Practice Analysis were performed similarly or differently in TGC compared to in person genetic counseling (IPGC). If there were differences noted, we sought to determine the nature of the differences and if additional training might be needed to address them. Eighty eight genetic counselors with experience in TGC completed some or all of the survey. Respondents identified differences in 13 (14.8%) of the 88 tasks studied. The tasks identified as most different in TGC were: "establishing rapport through verbal and nonverbal interactions" (60.2%; 50/83 respondents identified the task as different), "recognizing factors affecting the counseling interaction" (47.8%; 32/67), "assessing client/family emotions, support, etc." (40.1%; 27/66) and "educating clients about basic genetic concepts" (35.6%; 26/73). A slight majority (53.8%; 35/65) felt additional training was needed to communicate information without visual aids and more effectively perform psychosocial assessments. In summary, although a majority of genetic counseling tasks are performed similarly between TGC and IPGC, TGC counselors recognize that specific training in the TGC model may be needed to address the key differences.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10897-015-9848-2DOI Listing
February 2016

Models of service delivery for cancer genetic risk assessment and counseling.

J Genet Couns 2014 Apr 26;23(2):239-53. Epub 2013 Oct 26.

Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, 540 E. Canfield Street, 2375 Scott Hall, Detroit, MI, 48201, USA,

Increasing awareness of and the potentially concomitant increasing demand for cancer genetic services is driving the need to explore more efficient models of service delivery. The aims of this study were to determine which service delivery models are most commonly used by genetic counselors, assess how often they are used, compare the efficiency of each model as well as impact on access to services, and investigate the perceived benefits and barriers of each. Full members of the NSGC Familial Cancer Special Interest Group who subscribe to its listserv were invited to participate in a web-based survey. Eligible respondents were asked which of ten defined service delivery models they use and specific questions related to aspects of model use. One-hundred ninety-two of the approximately 450 members of the listserv responded (42.7%); 177 (92.2%) had provided clinical service in the last year and were eligible to complete all sections of the survey. The four direct care models most commonly used were the (traditional) face-to-face pre- and post-test model (92.2%), the face-to-face pretest without face-to-face post-test model (86.5%), the post-test counseling only for complex results model (36.2%), and the post test counseling for all results model (18.3%). Those using the face-to-face pretest only, post-test all, and post-test complex models reported seeing more new patients than when they used the traditional model and these differences were statistically significantly. There were no significant differences in appointment wait times or distances traveled by patients when comparing use of the traditional model to the other three models. Respondents recognize that a benefit of using alternative service delivery models is increased access to services; however, some are concerned that this may affect quality of care.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10897-013-9655-6DOI Listing
April 2014

Losing sight.

J Genet Couns 2012 Apr 3;21(2):232-4. Epub 2011 Dec 3.

Center for Molecular Medicine and Genetics, Wayne State University, 2375 Scott Hall, 540 E. Canfield Street, Detroit, MI 48201, USA.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10897-011-9455-9DOI Listing
April 2012

Essential elements of genetic cancer risk assessment, counseling, and testing: updated recommendations of the National Society of Genetic Counselors.

J Genet Couns 2012 Apr 2;21(2):151-61. Epub 2011 Dec 2.

Southeast Nebraska Cancer Center, Lincoln, NE, USA.

Updated from their original publication in 2004, these cancer genetic counseling recommendations describe the medical, psychosocial, and ethical ramifications of counseling at-risk individuals through genetic cancer risk assessment with or without genetic testing. They were developed by members of the Practice Issues Subcommittee of the National Society of Genetic Counselors Familial Cancer Risk Counseling Special Interest Group. The information contained in this document is derived from extensive review of the current literature on cancer genetic risk assessment and counseling as well as the personal expertise of genetic counselors specializing in cancer genetics. The recommendations are intended to provide information about the process of genetic counseling and risk assessment for hereditary cancer disorders rather than specific information about individual syndromes. Essential components include the intake, cancer risk assessment, genetic testing for an inherited cancer syndrome, informed consent, disclosure of genetic test results, and psychosocial assessment. These recommendations should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of management, nor does use of such recommendations guarantee a particular outcome. These recommendations do not displace a health care provider's professional judgment based on the clinical circumstances of a client.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10897-011-9462-xDOI Listing
April 2012

Perceptions of licensure: a survey of Michigan genetic counselors.

J Genet Couns 2009 Aug 19;18(4):357-65. Epub 2009 May 19.

Genomic Medicine Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.

This study by the Michigan Genetic Counselor Licensure Committee is the first known published documentation of genetic counselors' beliefs and attitudes about licensure. The response rate from genetic counselors in Michigan was 66% (41/62). Ninety-five percent of respondents were supportive of licensure. Respondents believed licensure would legitimize genetic counseling as a distinct allied healthcare profession (97.5%), increase the public's protection (75%), and allow genetic counselors to practice independently (67%). While 45% felt licensure would increase counselor involvement in lawsuits, this did not impact licensure support (p = 0.744). Opinions were split regarding physician supervision and ordering tests. Even though 28% favored physician supervision, there was overwhelming support for genetic counselors performing some components of genetic testing (95%) and ordering some types of genetic tests (82%) independent of a physician. Use of this survey may be helpful in other states to assess genetic counselors' interest in licensure and for drafting legislation.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10897-009-9225-0DOI Listing
August 2009