Richard N Waldman, Mark S DeFrancesco, John P Feltz, Daniel S Welling, Wade A Neiman, Melissa M Pearlstone, Christine A Marraccini, Dana Karanik, Elaine Mielcarski, Logan Schneider, Lauren Lenz, Edith C Smith, Katherine Johansen Taber, Royce T Adkins
{"title":"Online Screening and Virtual Patient Education for Hereditary Cancer Risk Assessment and Testing.","authors":"Richard N Waldman, Mark S DeFrancesco, John P Feltz, Daniel S Welling, Wade A Neiman, Melissa M Pearlstone, Christine A Marraccini, Dana Karanik, Elaine Mielcarski, Logan Schneider, Lauren Lenz, Edith C Smith, Katherine Johansen Taber, Royce T Adkins","doi":"10.1097/AOG.0000000000005799","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To use online screening and virtual patient education tools to improve the provision of hereditary cancer risk assessment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a prospective, single-arm study in which clinicians at five U.S. community obstetrics and gynecology practices underwent an 8-week observation followed by 3-4 weeks of training on online patient screening and virtual patient education (prerecorded video with or without a genetic counselor phone call) for genetic testing-eligible patients. After a 4-week practice period, hereditary cancer risk assessment and patient education metrics were collected at 8 weeks and compared with preintervention metrics using univariate conditional logistic regression models stratified by site. The primary outcome was the change in genetic testing completion rate. Clinicians and patients were invited to complete a satisfaction survey.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 5,795 and 5,135 patients were seen before and after the intervention, respectively. The proportion of screened patients meeting testing guidelines increased from 21.6% before the intervention to 28.2% after the intervention (odds ratio [OR] 1.36, 95% CI, 1.26-1.47, P<.001). Guideline-eligible patients were significantly more likely to be offered genetic testing (59.1% vs 89.1%, OR 2.06, 95% CI, 1.87-2.27, P<.001), to submit a sample (32.9% vs 45.0%, OR 1.49, 95% CI, 1.27-1.74, P<.001), and to complete testing (16.0% vs 34.2%, OR 2.38, 95% CI, 2.00-2.83, P<.001). Most clinicians agreed or strongly agreed that the screening tool improved the identification of patients meeting hereditary cancer risk assessment guidelines (92.1%), saved time (64.9%), and was easy to incorporate (68.4%) and that patient education improved their ability to deliver hereditary cancer risk assessment standard of care (84.2%). Most patients agreed or strongly agreed that virtual education helped them understand the purpose (91.7%) and implications (92.6%) of genetic testing.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A guideline-based online patient screening tool and virtual patient education were well received. The online tool enabled identification of significantly more guideline-eligible candidates for hereditary cancer risk assessment, and education improved patients' genetic literacy. Together, these tools ultimately improved the genetic testing completion rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":19483,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics and gynecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics and gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000005799","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To use online screening and virtual patient education tools to improve the provision of hereditary cancer risk assessment.
Methods: We conducted a prospective, single-arm study in which clinicians at five U.S. community obstetrics and gynecology practices underwent an 8-week observation followed by 3-4 weeks of training on online patient screening and virtual patient education (prerecorded video with or without a genetic counselor phone call) for genetic testing-eligible patients. After a 4-week practice period, hereditary cancer risk assessment and patient education metrics were collected at 8 weeks and compared with preintervention metrics using univariate conditional logistic regression models stratified by site. The primary outcome was the change in genetic testing completion rate. Clinicians and patients were invited to complete a satisfaction survey.
Results: A total of 5,795 and 5,135 patients were seen before and after the intervention, respectively. The proportion of screened patients meeting testing guidelines increased from 21.6% before the intervention to 28.2% after the intervention (odds ratio [OR] 1.36, 95% CI, 1.26-1.47, P<.001). Guideline-eligible patients were significantly more likely to be offered genetic testing (59.1% vs 89.1%, OR 2.06, 95% CI, 1.87-2.27, P<.001), to submit a sample (32.9% vs 45.0%, OR 1.49, 95% CI, 1.27-1.74, P<.001), and to complete testing (16.0% vs 34.2%, OR 2.38, 95% CI, 2.00-2.83, P<.001). Most clinicians agreed or strongly agreed that the screening tool improved the identification of patients meeting hereditary cancer risk assessment guidelines (92.1%), saved time (64.9%), and was easy to incorporate (68.4%) and that patient education improved their ability to deliver hereditary cancer risk assessment standard of care (84.2%). Most patients agreed or strongly agreed that virtual education helped them understand the purpose (91.7%) and implications (92.6%) of genetic testing.
Conclusion: A guideline-based online patient screening tool and virtual patient education were well received. The online tool enabled identification of significantly more guideline-eligible candidates for hereditary cancer risk assessment, and education improved patients' genetic literacy. Together, these tools ultimately improved the genetic testing completion rate.
期刊介绍:
"Obstetrics & Gynecology," affectionately known as "The Green Journal," is the official publication of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Since its inception in 1953, the journal has been dedicated to advancing the clinical practice of obstetrics and gynecology, as well as related fields. The journal's mission is to promote excellence in these areas by publishing a diverse range of articles that cover translational and clinical topics.
"Obstetrics & Gynecology" provides a platform for the dissemination of evidence-based research, clinical guidelines, and expert opinions that are essential for the continuous improvement of women's health care. The journal's content is designed to inform and educate obstetricians, gynecologists, and other healthcare professionals, ensuring that they stay abreast of the latest developments and best practices in their field.