Search

Prenatal genetic screening should be an informed, autonomous patient choice. Extrinsic factors which influence patient decision-making threaten the ethical basis of prenatal genetic screening. Prior research in the area of medical decision-making has identified that labeling may have unanticipated effects on patient perceptions and decision-making processes. This Internet-administered study explored the impact of option labeling on the noninvasive prenatal screening (NIPS) selections of US adults. A total of 1,062 participants were recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) and randomly assigned to one of three possible label sets reflecting provider-derived and industry-derived option labels used in prenatal screening. Multinomial logistic regression analysis showed option labeling had a statistically significant impact on the NIPS selections of study participants (p = .0288). Outcomes of the Satisfaction with Decision Scale (SWD) indicated option labels did not play a role in participant satisfaction with screening selection. The results of this study indicate a need for further evaluation of the impact NIPS option labeling has on patient screening decisions in real-world clinical interactions. Clinical providers and testing laboratories offering NIPS should give careful consideration to the option labels used with prenatal screening so as to minimize influence on patient screening selection and decision-making processes., (© 2019 National Society of Genetic Counselors.)

Background: To the authors' knowledge, studies regarding risk perception among survivors of thyroid cancer are scarce., Methods: The authors surveyed patients who were diagnosed with differentiated thyroid cancer from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries of Georgia and Los Angeles County (2632 patients; 63% response rate). The analytic cohort was defined by a ≤5% risk of disease recurrence and mortality (1597 patients). Patients estimated their recurrence and mortality risks separately (increments of 10% and endpoints of ≤5% and ≥95%). Both outcomes were dichotomized between reasonably accurate estimates (risk perception of ≤5% or 10%) versus overestimation (risk perception of ≥20%). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with risk overestimation, and the relationships between overestimation and both worry and quality of life were evaluated., Results: In the current study sample, 24.7% of patients overestimated their recurrence risk and 12.5% overestimated their mortality risk. A lower educational level was associated with overestimating disease recurrence (≤high school diploma: odds ratio [OR], 1.64 [95% CI, 1.16-2.31]; and some college: OR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.02-1.81]) and mortality (≤high school diploma: OR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.18-2.93]) risk compared with those attaining at least a college degree. Hispanic ethnicity was found to be associated with overestimating recurrence risk (OR, 1.44, 95% CI 1.02-2.03) compared with their white counterparts. Worry about recurrence and death was found to be greater among patients who overestimated versus those who had a reasonably accurate estimate of their risk of disease recurrence and mortality, respectively (P < .001). Patients who overestimated mortality risk also reported a decreased physical quality of life (mean T score, 43.1; 95% CI, 41.6-44.7) compared with the general population., Conclusions: Less educated patients and Hispanic patients were more likely to report inaccurate risk perceptions, which were associated with worry and a decreased quality of life., (© 2019 American Cancer Society.)

The amount of information produced by genomic sequencing is vast, technically complicated, and can be difficult to interpret. Appropriately tailoring genomic information for non-geneticists is an essential next step in the clinical use of genomic sequencing. To initiate development of a framework for genomic results communication, we conducted eighteen qualitative interviews with oncologists who had referred adult cancer patients to a matched tumor-normal tissue genomic sequencing study. In our qualitative analysis, we found varied levels of clinician knowledge relating to sequencing technology, the scope of the tumor genomic sequencing study, and incidental germline findings. Clinicians expressed a perceived need for more genetics education. Additionally, they had a variety of suggestions for improving results reports and possible resources to aid in results interpretation. Most clinicians felt genetic counselors were needed when incidental germline findings were identified. Our research suggests that more consistent genetics education is imperative in ensuring the proper utilization of genomic sequencing in cancer care. Clinician suggestions for results interpretation resources and results report modifications could be used to improve communication. Clinicians' perceived need to involve genetic counselors when incidental germline findings were found suggests genetic specialists could play a critical role in ensuring patients receive appropriate follow-up.

Objective: Fear of cancer recurrence, although distinct from distress continues to be under-evaluated, captured, or treated when standard distress scales are used to assess concerns of cancer survivors. We tested a model assessing the association of demographic and clinical factors, illness representations, and perceived risk with fear of cancer recurrence in breast cancer survivors., Methods: We recruited 117 breast cancer survivors at least one year after completing breast cancer treatment from Internet discussion boards for this cross-sectional, descriptive, correlational study. Participants completed a survey that assessed their level of fear of cancer recurrence as well as their illness representations, perceived risk of recurrence, and demographic and medical characteristics., Results: Our model explained 62% of the variance in fear of cancer recurrence. Emotional representations (β = .46, p < .01), symptom attribution (β = .21, p < .01), timeline (β = .23, p < .01), and consequences (β = .16, p < .03) were significantly related to fear of recurrence. By contrast, the majority of clinical and demographic variables were not significant contributors to fear of recurrence., Conclusions: Upon completion of cancer treatment, survivors with more emotional representations of the experience and those who attribute unrelated symptoms to their breast cancer have a higher level of fear of recurrence. Evaluation of these factors during treatment may help mitigate fear of recurrence in the survivorship phase of the breast cancer trajectory. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., (Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Although worry about recurrence is a persistent concern among breast cancer survivors, little is known about physicians' confidence about presenting recurrence risk information, identifying women with considerable worry, and helping women manage worry., Methods: Between January and June 2012, we surveyed 750 surgeons and 750 medical oncologists randomly sampled from the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. We tested differences between surgeons and medical oncologists on confidence of presenting risk, identifying and managing worry using chi-square statistic and Student's t-tests and developed multiple variable logistic regression models to explain odds regarding confidence and use of different strategies for managing worry., Results: The analytic sample included 403 surgeons and 363 medical oncologists (n = 766; response rate = 60%). Compared with surgeons, medical oncologists were significantly more likely to report confidence in: presenting risk information (87.5% vs 73.2%), identifying women who are worried (74.1% vs 63.9%), and managing worry (66.9% vs 52.4%). Confidence in managing worry was associated with more regular inquiry about worry (p = 0.009). Models of the likelihood of using different management strategies varied by provider type (e.g., surgeons more likely than medical oncologists to recommend support group or online resources, oncologists more likely to refer to psychologist or use medications, all p < 0.05)., Conclusion: Cancer providers, particularly surgeons, may benefit from educational training to raise confidence in identifying women with high levels of worry and managing women with considerable worry. Communication between specialties and primary care physicians on efforts to manage worry is necessary for coordinated, quality care for women with breast cancer., (Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Many decisions can be understood in terms of actors' valuations of benefits and costs. The article investigates whether this is also true of patient medical decision making. It aims to investigate (i) the importance patients attach to various reasons for and against nine medical decisions; (ii) how well the importance attached to benefits and costs predicts action or inaction; and (iii) how such valuations are related to decision confidence., Methods: In a national random digit dial telephone survey of U.S. adults, patients rated the importance of various reasons for and against medical decisions they had made or talked to a health-care provider about during the past 2 years. Participants were 2575 English-speaking adults age 40 and older. Data were analysed by means of logistic regressions predicting action/inaction and linear regressions predicting confidence., Results: Aggregating individual reasons into those that may be regarded as benefits and those that may be regarded as costs, and weighting them by their importance to the patient, shows the expected relationship to action. Perceived benefits and costs are also significantly related to the confidence patients report about their decision., Conclusion: The factors patients say are important in their medical decisions reflect a subjective weighing of benefits and costs and predict action/inaction although they do not necessarily indicate that patients are well informed. The greater the difference between the importance attached to benefits and costs, the greater patients' confidence in their decision., (© 2011 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)