Genetic counseling graduate program faculty perspectives on sharing education materials among programs.

Rapid advancements in genetics care requires responsive genetic counseling (GC) training capable of integrating new discoveries and practice into their curricula. The utilization of shared or standardized educational resources may address this need. Recognizing the potential of shared resources, the Pharmacogenetics (PGx) Working Group of the NSGC Precision Medicine Special Interest Group (SIG) launched a standardized education module using a flipped-classroom format to provide all GC programs equal access to PGx expertise and alleviate the burden of curriculum development. Following the initial success of the program, we aimed to explore the utilization of shared and standardized education resources more broadly, and better understand the perspectives of GC program faculty regarding their use. Twenty-nine program faculty representing at least 14 programs responded to an online survey. The majority (n = 21) reported sharing educational materials with another GC program, and 90% of those reported the shared materials to be beneficial as they promote collaboration, efficiency, address a gap in content, and provide access to experts. Similar benefits were described when using a standardized curriculum, which was defined as standardized lectures and activities created about a particular topic and made available to all genetic counseling programs; 16 participants indicated they would be very likely or likely to use a standardized curriculum. A secondary aim of the survey was to assess the existing PGx module that utilizes a flipped-classroom format. Overall, the PGx module was well received, indicating that a standardized shared module is well-suited for instruction on emerging and specialty topics. All participants believed the flipped-classroom format to be very or somewhat beneficial. In summary, results indicate that shared educational materials, including standardized education modules, are a potential solution to challenges related to efficiency and access to content experts in GC education, and program leadership is receptive to using them.

The value of a genetic counselor: improving identification of cancer genetic counseling patients with chart review.

Advances in genetics are changing cancer care and requiring institutions to maximize the unique skills of genetics professionals. The identification of genetic syndromes is vital for prevention and management of families with high cancer risks. Despite this, high risk individuals who qualify are often not referred. Genetic counselors could review oncology charts to improve identification. A genetics assessment tool developed by NCI Community Cancer Centers Program was used to perform self-assessment of the genetics program. A weekly report of all new oncology patients was provided to a genetic counselor for chart review. In 2010, 58 % of all eligible patients (n = 152) were offered a genetics evaluation. In 2011 this improved to 70 % (n = 167), which was a statistically significant difference, X (2)(1) = 5.13, p = 0.02. By cancer site, ovarian cancer referrals also showed statistically significant improvement, X (2)(1) = 6.36, p = 0.01. Breast and colon referrals were improved but not significant. Over 10 months, 129 patients were identified through the chart review program. Three were confirmed to have a genetic mutation for a hereditary cancer syndrome. An average week included review of 73 charts for 10 medical oncologists, 4 radiation oncologists, and 4 pediatric oncologists which generated 60-80 min of work for the genetic counselor. This program improved patient identification and quality, and allowed physicians to become more aware of opportunities for genetic counseling and more patients to receive genetic counseling and testing.

An assessment of risk understanding in Hispanic genetic counseling patients.

This study sought to identify if differences existed in risk comprehension and risk format understanding between genetic counseling patients of Hispanic and Caucasian ethnicity. A total of 107 questionnaires were collected, 56 from Hispanic patients, and 51 from Caucasian controls. Of the total population 41.1% (44/107) could not demonstrate sufficient risk understanding, which was 71.4% (40/56) of Hispanics and 7.8% (4/51) of Caucasians. Fractions were the best-understood format for all participants. However, both Hispanics and Caucasians had difficulties with the percentage risk format. Discrepancies were also noted in qualitative word format understanding. Awareness of differences in risk comprehension may affect the selection of counseling techniques and strategies utilized by genetic counselors when educating patients about risk related information.