Measuring the therapeutic bond in genetic counseling: Testing measurement error in the bond subscale of the Working Alliance Inventory.

The therapeutic relationship is a key component of successful genetic counseling. In psychotherapy, a strong therapeutic relationship can improve patient health outcomes and a poor relationship can worsen psychological functioning. Investigation of the therapeutic relationship in genetic counseling has shown evidence for a similar pattern. Reliable measurement of the therapeutic relationship is necessary for consistency across studies in the genetic counseling context. One measure that has been adapted for use in genetic counseling is the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI). However, there have been no studies of the factor structure or item-level method bias analyses for the genetic counseling-adapted version of the WAI. The goal of this study was to test the factor structure of the WAI observer version (WAI-O) bond subscale and assess method bias in a genetic counseling context. We hypothesized that differences in factor structures would exist for items that were positively (n = 9) versus negatively (n = 3) worded (reverse coded). Secondary data analysis was performed on two data sets that utilized the WAI-O in genetic counseling contexts. Data set 1 used simulated genetic counseling sessions that were judged by analog clients recruited through crowdsourcing platforms (N = 861). Data set 2 was conducted with genetic counseling clients, and sessions were evaluated by a research team (N = 120). Principal axis factor analysis with oblique oblimin rotation supported a two-factor solution for the WAI-O bond subscale across data sets. Items factored based on wording, with the positively worded items loading together and the negatively worded items loading on the second factor. Confirmatory factor analyses supported the removal of all negatively worded items from the instrument across data sets. Results suggest that the negatively worded items on the WAI-O may be capturing a construct inconsistent with the positively worded items and support rewording and/or excluding them from use for a more reliable measure of the therapeutic bond.

Beyond multiple choice: Clinical simulation as a rigorous and inclusive method for assessing genetic counseling competencies.

Educational use of clinical simulation is a way for students to immerse themselves within a realistic yet safe and structured environment as they practice clinical skills. It is widely used in healthcare training and evaluation, and there are best practices for design, implementation, debriefing, and assessment. An increasing number of genetic counseling graduate programs use simulation in various ways, ranging from role-plays to working with professional simulated/standardized patient (SP) actors. At this time, there is very little consistency across programs, research on the approaches, and standards by which simulation is incorporated into training. Simulation is an understudied but promising approach for genetic counselor (GC) education and assessment. After graduation, GCs demonstrate their competence as entry-level providers through American Board of Genetic Counseling (ABGC) multiple-choice examination (MCE), along with their participatory clinical encounters from graduate training. Data from genetic counseling and other professions highlight the limitations and biases of MCEs, suggesting they not only fail to accurately capture competency, but also that they disadvantage underrepresented individuals from entering the field. In addition, MCEs are limited as a tool for assessing nuanced counseling and communication skills, as compared to more quantitative scientific knowledge. We propose that innovative, evidence-based approaches such as simulation have the potential to not only enhance learning, but also to allow GCs to better demonstrate competency during training and in relation to the board examination. Collaborative approaches, research, and funding are needed to further explore the viability of routinely incorporating simulation into GC training and assessment.

Effects of Implicit Racial Bias and Standardized Patient Race on Genetic Counseling Students' Patient-Centered Communication.

Clinician racial bias has been associated with less patient-centered communication, but little is known about how it affects trainees' communication. We investigated genetic counseling students' communication during sessions with Black or White standardized patients (SPs) and the extent to which communication was associated with SP race or student scores on the Race Implicit Association Test (IAT). Sixty students conducted a baseline SP session and up to two follow-up sessions. Students were randomly assigned to a different White or Black SP and one of three clinical scenarios for each session. Fifty-six students completed the IAT. Session recordings were coded using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. Linear regression models assessed the effects of IAT score and SP race on a variety of patient-centered communication indicators. Random intercept models assessed the within-student effects of SP race on communication outcomes during the baseline session and in follow-up sessions (n = 138). Students were predominantly White (71%). Forty students (71%) had IAT scores indicating some degree of pro-White implicit preference. Baseline sessions with White relative to Black SPs had higher patient-centeredness scores. Within-participant analyses indicate that students used a higher proportion of back-channels (a facilitative behavior that cues interest and encouragement) and conducted longer sessions with White relative to Black SPs. Students' stronger pro-White IAT scores were associated with using fewer other facilitative statements during sessions with White relative to Black SPs. Different patterns of communication associated with SP race and student IAT scores were found for students than those found in prior studies with experienced clinicians.