EFFECTS OF COMMUNICATION COMPLEXITY ONANALOGUE CLIENTS IN A VIDEO CANCERGENETIC COUNSELING SESSION

genetic counseling;communication complexity;oral literacy demand;genetic literacy;Genetic Counseling

Bonkowski, Emily SusanErby, Lori ;

Johns Hopkins University

关键词: genetic counseling;    communication complexity;    oral literacy demand;    genetic literacy;    Genetic Counseling;   

Others  :  https://jscholarship.library.jhu.edu/bitstream/handle/1774.2/59217/BONKOWSKI-THESIS-2018.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

瑞士|英语

来源: JOHNS HOPKINS DSpace Repository

【 摘 要 】

Objective: Communication of information plays a central role in genetic counseling. There have been few direct comparisons of differing communication approaches. This research study aimed to experimentally manipulate communication of genetic information and to describe how the complexity of counselor communication impacts client affective and cognitive outcomes using a hypothetical cancer genetic counseling scenario.Methods: The study used a mixed methods experimental design consisting of a web-based module that simulated specific educational and communication aspects of a cancer genetic counseling session. Female study participants (N=286) were randomly assigned to watch one of three simulated video genetic counselor sessions of either high, medium, or low communication complexity consisting of 8-21 minute of short video clips. Demographic information, personal perceived cancer risk, genetic literacy, and patient-provider orientation were collected before beginning the videos, and survey instruments were administered after the videos to capture decisional, affective, and cognitive outcomes.Results: Low complexity communication of information reduced feelings of negative emotion (including confusion) compared to the high complexity group. Individuals in the medium complexity group felt more decisional conflict than the high complexity group. No other main effects on measured genetic counseling outcomes were detected. Genetic literacy and patient-provider orientation had modifying effects on the relationship between complexity level and some outcomes. Personal characteristics, including age, race, perceived personal risk of cancer, genetic literacy, and patient-provider orientation were associated with some genetic counseling outcomes. Participants generally found the experience to be realistic. Conclusions: Low complexity communication did not elicit poorer outcomes than high complexity communication overall. Our findings also support the notion that personal factors influence clients’ reactions to genetic counseling communication. In accordance with principles of patient-centered communication, it is important to tailor communication to fit clients’ needs.