» Articles » PMID: 15280342

Effect of a Computer-based Decision Aid on Knowledge, Perceptions, and Intentions About Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer Susceptibility: a Randomized Controlled Trial

Overview
Journal JAMA
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2004 Jul 29
PMID 15280342
Citations 125
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Context: As the availability of and demand for genetic testing for hereditary cancers increases in primary care and other clinical settings, alternative or adjunct educational methods to traditional genetic counseling will be needed.

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of a computer-based decision aid with standard genetic counseling for educating women about BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic testing.

Design: Randomized controlled trial conducted from May 2000 to September 2002.

Setting And Participants: Outpatient clinics offering cancer genetic counseling at 6 US medical centers enrolled 211 women with personal or family histories of breast cancer.

Interventions: Standard one-on-one genetic counseling (n = 105) or education by a computer program followed by genetic counseling (n = 106).

Main Outcome Measures: Participants' knowledge, risk perception, intention to undergo genetic testing, decisional conflict, satisfaction with decision, anxiety, and satisfaction with the intervention. Counselor group measures were administered at baseline and after counseling. Computer group measures were administered at baseline, after computer use, and after counseling. Testing decisions were assessed at 1 and 6 months. Outcomes were analyzed by high vs low risk of carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation.

Results: Both groups had comparable demographics, prior computer experience, medical literacy, and baseline knowledge of breast cancer and genetic testing, and both counseling and computer use were rated highly. Knowledge scores increased in both groups (P<.001) regardless of risk status, and change in knowledge was greater in the computer group compared with the counselor group (P =.03) among women at low risk of carrying a mutation. Perception of absolute risk of breast cancer decreased significantly after either intervention among all participants. Intention to undergo testing decreased significantly after either intervention among low-risk but not high-risk women. The counselor group had lower mean scores on a decisional conflict scale (P =.04) and, in low-risk women, higher mean scores on a satisfaction-with-decision scale (P =.001). Mean state anxiety scores were reduced by counseling but were within normal ranges for both groups at baseline and after either intervention, regardless of risk status.

Conclusions: An interactive computer program was more effective than standard genetic counseling for increasing knowledge of breast cancer and genetic testing among women at low risk of carrying a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. However, genetic counseling was more effective than the computer at reducing women's anxiety and facilitating more accurate risk perceptions. These results suggest that this computer program has the potential to stand alone as an educational intervention for low-risk women but should be used as a supplement to genetic counseling for those at high risk.

Citing Articles

Genetics Adviser: The development and usability testing of a new patient digital health application to support clinical genomic testing.

Clausen M, Krishnapillai S, Hirjikaka D, Kodida R, Shickh S, Reble E Genet Med Open. 2024; 2:101814.

PMID: 39669596 PMC: 11613922. DOI: 10.1016/j.gimo.2024.101814.


Genetics Navigator: protocol for a mixed methods randomized controlled trial evaluating a digital platform to deliver genomic services in Canadian pediatric and adult populations.

DAmours G, Clausen M, Luca S, Reble E, Kodida R, Assamad D BMJ Open. 2024; 14(9):e090084.

PMID: 39231549 PMC: 11407190. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-090084.


Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

Stacey D, Lewis K, Smith M, Carley M, Volk R, Douglas E Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024; 1:CD001431.

PMID: 38284415 PMC: 10823577. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub6.


Risk-management decision-making data from a community-based sample of racially diverse women at high risk of breast cancer: rationale, methods, and sample characteristics of the Daughter Sister Mother Project survey.

Padamsee T, Bijou C, Swinehart-Hord P, Hils M, Muraveva A, Meadows R Breast Cancer Res. 2024; 26(1):8.

PMID: 38212792 PMC: 10785448. DOI: 10.1186/s13058-023-01753-x.


Impact of a risk based breast screening decision aid on understanding, acceptance and decision making.

Lippey J, Keogh L, Campbell I, Mann G, Forrest L NPJ Breast Cancer. 2023; 9(1):65.

PMID: 37553371 PMC: 10409718. DOI: 10.1038/s41523-023-00569-4.


References
1.
Green M, Fost N . Who should provide genetic education prior to gene testing? Computers and other methods for improving patient understanding. Genet Test. 1997; 1(2):131-6. DOI: 10.1089/gte.1997.1.131. View

2.
Friedman L, Cooper H, Webb J, Weinberg A, Plon S . Primary care physicians' attitudes and practices regarding cancer genetics: a comparison of 2001 with 1996 survey results. J Cancer Educ. 2003; 18(2):91-4. DOI: 10.1207/S15430154JCE1802_11. View

3.
Lerman C, Biesecker B, Benkendorf J, Kerner J, Gomez-Caminero A, Hughes C . Controlled trial of pretest education approaches to enhance informed decision-making for BRCA1 gene testing. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1997; 89(2):148-57. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/89.2.148. View

4.
Green M, McInerney A, Biesecker B, Fost N . Education about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: patient preferences for a computer program or genetic counselor. Am J Med Genet. 2001; 103(1):24-31. DOI: 10.1002/ajmg.1501. View

5.
Escher M, Sappino A . Primary care physicians' knowledge and attitudes towards genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer predisposition. Ann Oncol. 2000; 11(9):1131-5. DOI: 10.1023/a:1008319114278. View