Randomized comparison of phone versus in-person BRCA1/2 predisposition genetic test result disclosure counseling

• Published in: Genetics in medicine Vol. 9; no. 8; pp. 487 - 495
• Main Authors: Jenkins, Jean, Calzone, Kathleen A., Dimond, Eileen, Liewehr, David J., Steinberg, Seth M., Jourkiv, Oxana, Klein, Pam, Soballe, Peter W., Prindiville, Sheila A., Kirsch, Ilan R.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.08.2007
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Anxiety - etiology; Anxiety - psychology; Apoptosis Regulatory Proteins; BRCA1 Protein - genetics; BRCA2 Protein - genetics; Female; Genetic Counseling; Genetic Predisposition to Disease - psychology; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Satisfaction; Telephone
• ISSN: 1098-3600; 1530-0366; 1530-0366
• DOI: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e31812e6220

This study evaluated whether phone results were equivalent to in-person result disclosure for individuals undergoing BRCA1/2 predisposition genetic testing. A total of 111 of 136 subjects undergoing education and counseling for BRCA1/2 predisposition genetic testing agreed to randomization to phone or in-person result disclosure. Content and format for both sessions were standardized. Data from the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and the Psychological General Well-Being index were collected at baseline and then again at 1 week and 3 months after disclosure of test results. Baseline measures were administered after the following had occurred: counseling/education session had been conducted, informed consent had been obtained, and decision to be tested had been made. Satisfaction and cost assessments were administered after the result session. At 1 week, participants were asked their preferred method of result disclosure. There were no differences in anxiety and general well-being measures between 50 phone and 52 in-person results disclosure. Both groups reported similar rates of satisfaction with services. Among those with a preference, 77% preferred the notification method assigned. There was a statistically significant preference for phone results among the 23% who did not prefer the method assigned. Greater costs were associated with in-person result disclosure. These data suggest that phone results are a reasonable alternative to traditional in-person BRCA1/2 genetic test disclosure without any negative psychologic outcomes or compromise in knowledge. However, further study is needed in a more clinically representative population to confirm these findings.