Abstract
Little data currently exist regarding whether and how different characteristics of a patient and session influence outcomes of genetic counseling (GC). We conducted an exploratory retrospective chart review of data from a specialist psychiatric GC clinic (where patients complete the Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale (GCOS) as part of routine care before and after GC). We used ANOVA and linear regression to analyze GCOS change scores in relation to twelve patient/session-related variables. Three hundred and seven charts were included in analyses. Overall, GCOS scores increased significantly after GC, with large effect size (p < 0.0005, d = 1.10), and significant increases in all GCOS subdomains except adaptation. Significant associations with GCOS change score were identified for three variables: mode of delivery of GC (in-person/telephone/telehealth, p = 0.048, η2 = 0.020), primary indication for the appointment (understanding recurrence risk versus other primary indications, p = 0.001, η2 = 0.037), and baseline GCOS score (p < 0.000, R = 0.353). Our data showing that those with low baseline GCOS scores benefit most from GC could be used to explore the possibility of triaging those referred for GC based on this variable, and/or to identify individuals to refer to GC.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Redlinger-Grosse K, Veach PMC, Cohen S, LeRoy BS, MacFarlane IM, Zierhut H. Defining our clinical practice: the identification of genetic counseling outcomes utilizing the reciprocal engagement model. J Genet Couns. 2016;25:239–57.
Zierhut HA, Shannon KM, Cragun DL, Cohen SA. Elucidating genetic counseling outcomes from the perspective of genetic counselors. J Genet Couns. 2016;25:993–1001.
Burke W, Culver JO, Bowen D, Lowry D, Durfy S, McTiernan A, et al. Genetic counseling for women with an intermediate family history of breast cancer. Am J Med Genet. 2000;90:361–8.
Cabrera E, Blanco I, Yagüe C, Zabalegui A. The impact of genetic counseling on knowledge and emotional responses in Spanish population with family history of breast cancer. Patient Educ Couns. 2010;78:382–8.
Cragun D, Camperlengo L, Robinson E, Caldwell M, Kim J, Phelan C, et al. Differences in BRCA counseling and testing practices based on ordering provider type. Genet Med. 2015;17:51–7.
Oberguggenberger A, Sztankay M, Morscher RJ, Sperner-Unterweger B, Weber I, Hubalek M, et al. Psychosocial outcomes and counselee satisfaction following genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: a patient-reported outcome study. J Psychosom Res. 2016;89:39–45.
Madlensky L, Trepanier AM, Cragun D, Lerner B, Shannon KM, Zierhut H. A rapid systematic review of outcomes studies in genetic counseling. J Genet Couns. 2017;26:361–78.
Ison HE, Ware SM, Schwantes-An T-H, Freeze S, Elmore L, Spoonamore KG. The impact of cardiovascular genetic counseling on patient empowerment. J Genet Couns. 2019;28:570–7.
Buchanan AH, Datta SK, Skinner CS, Hollowell GP, Beresford HF, Freeland T, et al. Randomized trial of telegenetics vs. in-person cancer genetic counseling: cost, patient satisfaction and attendance. J Genet Couns. 2015;24:961–70.
Schwartz MD, Valdimarsdottir HB, Peshkin BN, Mandelblatt J, Nusum R, Huang A-T, et al. Randomized noninferiority trial of telephone versus in-person genetic counseling for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:618–26.
Slomp C, Morris E, Inglis A, Lehman A, Austin J. Patient outcomes of genetic counseling: assessing the impact of different approaches to family history collection. Clin Genet. 2018;93:830–6.
Borle K, Morris E, Inglis A, Austin J. Risk communication in genetic counseling: exploring uptake and perception of recurrence numbers, and their impact on patient outcomes. Clin Genet. 2018;94:239–45.
Morris E, Best J, Inglis A, Austin J. Impact of the physical environment on patient outcomes of genetic counseling: an exploratory study. J Genet Couns. 2019;28:760–6.
Austin JC, Honer WG. Psychiatric genetic counselling for parents of individuals affected with psychotic disorders: a pilot study. Early Intervention Psychiatry. 2008;2:80–89.
Costain G, Esplen MJ, Toner B, Scherer SW, Meschino WS, Hodgkinson KA, et al. Evaluating genetic counseling for individuals with schizophrenia in the molecular age. Schizophrenia Bull. 2014;40:78–87.
Costain G, Esplen MJ, Toner B, Hodgkinson KA, Bassett AS. Evaluating genetic counseling for family members of individuals with schizophrenia in the molecular age. Schizophrenia Bull. 2014;40:88–99.
Hippman C, Ringrose A, Inglis A, Cheek J, Albert A, Remick R, et al. A pilot randomized clinical trial evaluating the impact of genetic counseling for serious mental illnesses. J Clin Psychiatry. 2016;77:190–8.
Inglis A, Koehn D, Mcgillivray B, Stewart SE, Austin J. Evaluating a unique, specialist psychiatric genetic counseling clinic: uptake and impact. Clin Genet. 2015;87:218–24.
Moldovan R, Pintea S, Austin J. The efficacy of genetic counseling for psychiatric disorders: a meta-analysis. J Genet Couns. 2017;26:1341–7.
Costal Tirado A, McDermott AM, Thomas C, Ferrick D, Harris J, Edwards A, et al. Using patient-reported outcome measures for quality improvement in clinical genetics: an exploratory study. J Genet Couns. 2017;26:1017–28.
Mcallister M, Wood A, Dunn G, Shiloh S, Todd C. The Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale: a new patient-reported outcome measure for clinical genetics services. Clin Genet. 2011;79:413–24.
Resta R, Bowles Biesecker B, Bennett R, Blum S, Hahn SE, Strecker MN, et al. A new definition of genetic counseling: national society of genetic counselors’ task force report. J Genet Couns. 2006;15:77–83.
Austin, JC. Evidence-based genetic counseling for psychiatric disorders: a road map. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a036608.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) – a metadata-driven meth- odology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–81.
Thomas C, Mcallister M. Establishing the minimum clinically important difference for the Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale (GCOS‐24). J Genet Couns. 2019;28:1–8.
Thomas C, Mcallister M. Establishing the minimum clinically important difference for the Genetic Counseling Outcome Scale (GCOS‐24). J Genet Couns. 2019;28:1–8.
Christensen KD, Roberts JS, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Kardia SLR, McBride CM, Linnenbringer E, et al. Associations between self-referral and health behavior responses to genetic risk information. Genome Med. 2015;7:1–11.
Snyder DC, Sloane R, Lobach D, Lipkus IM, Peterson B, Kraus W, et al. Differences in baseline characteristics and outcomes at 1- and 2-year follow-up of cancer survivors accrued via self-referral versus cancer registry in the FRESH START Diet and exercise trial. Cancer Epidemiol, Biomark Prev. 2008;17:1288–94.
Audrain J, Schwartz MD, Lerman C, Hughes C, Peshkin BN, Biesecker B. Psychological distress in women seeking genetic counseling for breast-ovarian cancer risk: the contributions of personality and appraisal. Ann Behav Med. 1998;19:370–7.
Henrikson NB, Harris JN, Bowen DJ. Predictors of self-referral into a cancer genetics registry. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2007;16:1387–92.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Dr Arianne Albert for her assistance regarding the statistical analyses and Caitlin Slomp for her insight throughout the research process. This research was supported by Janelle Villiers, and the Joan H. Marks Graduate Program in Human Genetics at Sarah Lawrence College. JA was supported by the Canada Research Chairs program, and the British Columbia Mental Health and Substance use Services. The authors thank the members of the Translational Psychiatric Genetics Group for their varied support and contributions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gerrard, S., Inglis, A., Morris, E. et al. Relationships between patient- and session-related variables and outcomes of psychiatric genetic counseling. Eur J Hum Genet 28, 907–914 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-020-0592-1
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Version of record:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41431-020-0592-1
This article is cited by
-
Exploring the potential usefulness of the GCOS-16 for expanded applications
European Journal of Human Genetics (2025)
