Delivery of cancer genetics services: The Royal Marsden telephone clinic model

The growing needs of genetic counselling-Feasibility in utilization of tele-genetic counselling in Asia and Hong Kong

The need for the expansion of genomic services has been at a record time high in the past decade. As technological advancement continues to strengthen the entire genetic and genomic pipeline and clinical operational workflow, the major challenge remains to be the speed of workforce development to meet service growth. In particular, the international expansion of genetic counselling (GC) services has been a topic of interest for the past few years. GC is an emerging profession in most of Asia, and in many countries the profession of GC often refers to physicians or front-line health workers with expertise in genetics to provide GC services rather than being a specific independent profession. As genetic and genomic services, especially pre-test and post-test GC, expand globally, the need to tackle the longstanding obstacles of GC personnel shortage and funding issues must not be overlooked. There is an urgent need internationally, and especially in Asia, where GC profession is comparatively less well-established, to seek alternative approaches to meet service demand. The present review examines the global development and feasibility of tele-genetics and tele-genetic counselling (TGC), and serves as the foundation to explore a possible roadmap in Hong Kong via the Hong Kong Genome Project.

Telehealth for genetic counseling: A systematic evidence review

Telehealth options, such as telephone counseling or videoconferencing, for service delivery in genetic counseling are becoming more widely accepted. However, until now, there has not been a systematic review of the literature focused specifically on genetic counseling outcomes for telehealth. We performed a systematic evidence review to compare telehealth genetic counseling (THGC), including videoconferencing and telephone counseling, across specialties to in-person genetic counseling (IPGC) for a range of outcomes specific to patient and provider experiences and access to care. Several biomedical databases were queried up to January 11, 2021, to identify original research evaluating THGC. Through this search, 42 articles met the inclusion criteria including 13 randomized controlled trials and 29 non-randomized observational studies encompassing 13,901 patients. Most included studies focused only on cancer genetic counseling; however, adult, pediatric, and prenatal specialties were also represented. The majority of studies evaluated patient and/or access to care outcomes. Though most studies reported high patient satisfaction with THGC, as well as comparable rates of trust and rapport, confidence in privacy, health behavior changes, and psychosocial outcomes, few represented diverse populations. Data of provider experiences were limited and varied with more disadvantages noted compared with patient experiences, particularly in studies involving telephone genetic counseling. Studies consistently reported a decrease in the patients' costs and time required for travel when patients are seen via THGC compared to IPGC with a similar reduction in costs to the health system. Overall, results from our evidence synthesis suggest THGC is non-inferior or comparable to IPGC across many domains, even considering that many of the studies included in this review were conducted with telehealth systems, notably videoconferencing, that were less robust and reliable than what is available today. There are notable limitations within this body of literature, leading to potential uncertainty in the generalizability of our analysis. We outline several recommendations for future studies.

Randomized Noninferiority Trial of Telephone vs In-Person Disclosure of Germline Cancer Genetic Test Results

Background

Germline genetic testing is standard practice in oncology. Outcomes of telephone disclosure of a wide range of cancer genetic test results, including multigene panel testing (MGPT) are unknown.

Methods

Patients undergoing cancer genetic testing were recruited to a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial (NCT01736345) comparing telephone disclosure (TD) of genetic test results with usual care, in-person disclosure (IPD) after tiered-binned in-person pretest counseling. Primary noninferiority outcomes included change in knowledge, state anxiety, and general anxiety. Secondary outcomes included cancer-specific distress, depression, uncertainty, satisfaction, and screening and risk-reducing surgery intentions. To declare noninferiority, we calculated the 98.3% one-sided confidence interval of the standardized effect; t tests were used for secondary subgroup analyses. Only noninferiority tests were one-sided, others were two-sided.

Results

A total of 1178 patients enrolled in the study. Two hundred eight (17.7%) participants declined random assignment due to a preference for in-person disclosure; 473 participants were randomly assigned to TD and 497 to IPD; 291 (30.0%) had MGPT. TD was noninferior to IPD for general and state anxiety and all secondary outcomes immediately postdisclosure. TD did not meet the noninferiority threshold for knowledge in the primary analysis, but it did meet the threshold in the multiple imputation analysis. In secondary analyses, there were no statistically significant differences between arms in screening and risk-reducing surgery intentions, and no statistically significant differences in outcomes by arm among those who had MGPT. In subgroup analyses, patients with a positive result had statistically significantly greater decreases in general anxiety with telephone disclosure (TD -0.37 vs IPD +0.87, P = .02).

Conclusions

Even in the era of multigene panel testing, these data suggest that telephone disclosure of cancer genetic test results is as an alternative to in-person disclosure for interested patients after in-person pretest counseling with a genetic counselor.

Models of service delivery for cancer genetic risk assessment and counseling

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.

Evaluation of phone-based genetic counselling in African American women using culturally tailored visual aids

Genetic counselling (GC) services for inherited breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) are underutilized by African American (AA) women. We sought to evaluate factors associated with knowledge gain in a sample of AA women diagnosed with early-onset breast cancer, in whom GC for HBOC was provided, using a culturally targeted genetic counselling aid (GCA). Through a cancer registry-based study, phone-based GC for HBOC was offered to AA women with breast cancer < or =50. A questionnaire to assess knowledge about HBOC was completed prior to GC. All women were provided a GCA about HBOC developed by the investigative team for use during the GC session. Following GC, a personalized summary letter was mailed to all study participants and the same knowledge questionnaire was completed. A total of 37 study participants completed the pre- and post-GC knowledge questionnaires with significant gains in knowledge following the GC process (p < 0.0001). Statistically significant factors associated with knowledge gain included earlier stage of diagnosis of breast cancer and education level. Our results indicate that phone-based GC supplemented by a culturally targeted visual aid is an effective means of improving knowledge about HBOC in young AA women with invasive breast cancer.

Quality assurance in medical and public health genetics services: a systematic review

As genetic services grow in scope, issues of quality assessment in genetic services are emerging. These efforts are well developed for molecular and cytogenetic testing and laboratories, and newborn screening programs, but assessing quality in clinical services has lagged, perhaps owing to the small work force and the recent evolution from a few large training programs to multiple training sites. We surveyed the English language, peer-reviewed literature to summarize the knowledge-base of quality assessment of genetics services, organized into the tripartite categories of the Donabedian model of "structure," "process," and "outcome." MEDLINE searches from 1990 to July 2008, yielded 2,143 articles that addressed both "medical/genetic screening and counseling" and "quality indicators, control, and assurance." Of the 2,143 titles, 131 articles were extracted for in-depth analysis, and 55 were included in this review. Twenty-nine articles focused on structure, 19 on process, and seven on outcomes. Our review underscored the urgent need for a coherent model that will provide health care organizations with tools to assess, report, monitor, and improve quality. The structure, process, and outcomes domains that make up the quality framework provide a comprehensive lens through which to examine quality in medical genetics.

Telephone genetic counseling for high-risk women undergoing BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing: rationale and development of a randomized controlled trial

Genetic counseling and testing, particularly for adult onset conditions, has become increasingly available over the last decade, and it is expected that this trend will continue as additional genes are identified and as such testing diffuses into mainstream clinical care. To meet the increased demand for services, it will become necessary to explore alternative avenues to traditional face-to-face genetic counseling. One such modality is the use of telephone genetic counseling (TGC), which is easy to implement and still allows for comprehensive service delivery. Although TGC has been used with increased frequency, there is a paucity of data about its effectiveness and impact on important patient outcomes. This paper provides an overview of the evolution of telephone counseling in nongenetics and genetics settings. The rationale and aims of the largest randomized clinical trial to be performed with this mode of counseling in the context of cancer susceptibility testing for mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are also explained. In addition, procedural aspects of the genetic counseling intervention and the novel tools developed to facilitate this process and to ensure adequate counselor training and quality assurance are described.