Coping Self-Efficacy and Its Relationship with Psychological Morbidity after Genetic Test Result Disclosure: Results from Cancer-Unaffected BRCA1/2 Mutation Carriers.

Women who are found to carry a BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant experience psychological distress due to an increased risk of breast and ovarian cancer. They may decide between different preventive options. In this secondary analysis of data collected alongside a larger randomized controlled trial, we are looking at 130 newly found BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers and how their coping self-efficacy immediately after genetic test result disclosure is related to their psychological burden and status of preventive decision making. Participants received the Coping Self-Efficacy Scale, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Impact of Event Scale, the Decisional Conflict Scale, and the Stage of Decision-Making Scale after positive genetic test result disclosure. We found that women with higher coping self-efficacy showed fewer symptoms of anxiety or depression and were less affected by receiving the genetic test result in terms of post-traumatic stress. However, coping self-efficacy had no relationship with any decision-related criteria, such as decisional conflict or stage of decision making. This shows that despite its buffering capacity on psychological burden, possessing coping self-efficacy does not lead to more decisiveness in preference-sensitive decisions.

Nurse-led decision coaching by specialized nurses for healthy BRCA1/2 gene mutation carriers - adaptation and pilot testing of a curriculum for nurses: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Women with BRCA1/2 mutations are at high risk to develop breast and ovarian cancer. To support these women to participate in shared decision-making, structured nurse-led decision coaching combined with an evidence-based decision aid may be employed. In preparation of the interprofessional randomized controlled trial to evaluate a decision coaching program to support preventive decisions of healthy female BRCA 1/2 gene mutation carriers (EDCP-BRCA), we adapted and piloted an existing training program for specialized nurses and included elements from an existing physician communication training. METHODS: The training was adapted according to the six-step-approach for medical curriculum development. The educational design is based on experience- and problem-based learning. Subsequently, we conducted a qualitative pilot study. Nurses were recruited from six German centers for familial breast and ovarian cancer. The acceptability and feasibility were assessed by structured class observations, field notes and participants' feedback. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The training was revised according to the results. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the patient intervention was adapted as a virtual coaching and a brief additional training for nurses was added. RESULTS: The training consists of two modules (2 + 1 day) that teach competences in evidence-based medicine and patient information, (risk) communication and decision coaching. One pilot test was conducted with six nurses of which three were specialized and experienced in patient counselling. A final set of eight main categories was derived from the data: framework conditions; interaction; schedule, transparency of goals, content, methods, materials and practical relevance and feasibility. Overall, the training was feasible and comprehensible. Decision coaching materials were awkward to handle and decision coaching role plays were set too short. Therefore, materials will be sent out in advance and the training was extended. CONCLUSIONS: Specialized nurses are rarely available and nurse-led counselling is not routinely implemented in the centers of familial breast and ovarian cancer. However, training of less qualified nurses seems feasible. Decision coaching in a virtual format seems to be a promising approach. Further research is needed to evaluate its feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The main trial is registered under DRKS-ID: DRKS00015527 .

Effects of complex interventions in 'skin cancer prevention and treatment': protocol for a mixed-method systematic review with qualitative comparative analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Occurring from ultraviolet radiation combined with impairing ozone levels, uncritical sun exposure and use of tanning beds an increasing number of people are affected by different types of skin cancer. But preventive interventions like skin cancer screening are still missing the evidence for effectiveness and therefore are criticised. Fundamental for an appropriate course of action is to approach the defined parameters as measures for effectiveness critically. A prerequisite should be the critical application of used parameter that are defined as measures for effectiveness. This research seeks to establish, through the available literature, the effects and conditions that prove the effectiveness of prevention strategies in skin cancer. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: A mixed-method approach is employed to combine quantitative to qualitative methods and answer what effects can display effectiveness considering time horizon, perspective and organisational level and what are essential and sufficient conditions to prove effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in skin cancer prevention strategies. A systematic review will be performed to spot studies from any design and assess the data quantitatively and qualitatively. Included studies from each key question will be summarised by characteristics like population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, study design, endpoints, effect estimator and so on. Beside statistical relevancies for a systematic review the qualitative method of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) will be performed. The estimated outcomes from this review and QCA are the accomplishment and absence of effects that are appropriate for application in effectiveness assessments and further cost-effectiveness assessment. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Formal ethical approval is not required as primary data will not be collected. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: International Prospective Register for Systematic Reviews number CRD42017053859.

The economic burden of visual impairment and blindness: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Visual impairment and blindness (VI&B) cause a considerable and increasing economic burden in all high-income countries due to population ageing. Thus, we conducted a review of the literature to better understand all relevant costs associated with VI&B and to develop a multiperspective overview. DESIGN: Systematic review: Two independent reviewers searched the relevant literature and assessed the studies for inclusion and exclusion criteria as well as quality. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR INCLUDED STUDIES: Interventional, non-interventional and cost of illness studies, conducted prior to May 2012, investigating direct and indirect costs as well as intangible effects related to visual impairment and blindness were included. METHODS: We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement approach to identify the relevant studies. A meta-analysis was not performed due to the variability of the reported cost categories and varying definition of visual impairment. RESULTS: A total of 22 studies were included. Hospitalisation and use of medical services around diagnosis and treatment at the onset of VI&B were the largest contributor to direct medical costs. The mean annual expenses per patient were found to be US$ purchasing power parities (PPP) 12 175-14 029 for moderate visual impairment, US$ PPP 13 154-16 321 for severe visual impairment and US$ PPP 14 882-24 180 for blindness, almost twofold the costs for non-blind patients. Informal care was the major contributor to other direct costs, with the time spent by caregivers increasing from 5.8 h/week (or US$ PPP 263) for persons with vision >20/32 up to 94.1 h/week (or US$ PPP 55 062) for persons with vision ≤20/250. VI&B caused considerable indirect costs due to productivity losses, premature mortality and dead-weight losses. CONCLUSIONS: VI&B cause a considerable economic burden for affected persons, their caregivers and society at large, which increases with the degree of visual impairment. This review provides insight into the distribution of costs and the economic impact of VI&B.