Effect of a computer-based decision aid on knowledge, perceptions, and intentions about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: a randomized controlled trial.

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.

[1]  B. Trock,et al.  BRCA1 testing in families with hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. A prospective study of patient decision making and outcomes. , 1996, JAMA.

[2]  A. O'Connor Validation of a Decisional Conflict Scale , 1995, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[3]  K. Calzone,et al.  Genetic Testing for Cancer Predisposition , 2002, Cancer nursing.

[4]  H. Lynch,et al.  Psychologic Aspects of Cancer Genetic Testing: A Research Update for Clinicians , 1997 .

[5]  D. Berry,et al.  Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2. , 1998, American journal of human genetics.

[6]  G. Lenoir,et al.  Pretest prediction of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation by risk counselors and the computer model BRCAPRO. , 2002, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[7]  M. Escher,et al.  Primary care physicians' knowledge and attitudes towards genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer predisposition. , 2000, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[8]  Giovanni Parmigiani,et al.  BRCAPRO validation, sensitivity of genetic testing of BRCA1/BRCA2, and prevalence of other breast cancer susceptibility genes. , 2002, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[9]  W. Burke,et al.  Genetic Testing , 2019, Definitions.

[10]  Adopted on March American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[11]  S. Plon,et al.  Primary care physicians' attitudes and practices regarding cancer genetics: a comparison of 2001 with 1996 survey results. , 2009, Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education.

[12]  J. Benkendorf,et al.  Controlled trial of pretest education approaches to enhance informed decision-making for BRCA1 gene testing. , 1997, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[13]  B. Baty Counseling by computer: Breast cancer risk and genetic testing , 1999 .

[14]  Lori B. Andrews,et al.  Assessing Genetic Risks: Implications for Health and Social Policy , 1994 .

[15]  G Kahn,et al.  Computer-based patient education: a progress report. , 1993, M.D. computing : computers in medical practice.

[16]  H Campbell,et al.  GPs' views on their role in cancer genetics services and current practice. , 1999, Family practice.

[17]  B. Biesecker,et al.  An interactive computer program can effectively educate patients about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. , 2001, American journal of medical genetics.

[18]  M. Holmes-Rovner,et al.  Patient Satisfaction with Health Care Decisions , 1996, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[19]  N. Fost,et al.  Who should provide genetic education prior to gene testing? Computers and other methods for improving patient understanding. , 1997, Genetic testing.

[20]  A. Howell,et al.  Risk perception and cancer worry: an exploratory study of the impact of genetic risk counselling in women with a family history of breast cancer , 2001, Journal of medical genetics.

[21]  B. Wilfond,et al.  Genetic Testing for Susceptibility to Adult-Onset Cancer: The Process and Content of Informed Consent , 1997 .

[22]  Holtzman Na,et al.  Promoting safe and effective genetic testing in the United States. Final report of the Task Force on Genetic Testing. , 1999, Journal of child and family nursing.

[23]  P. Hopwood,et al.  Breast cancer risk perception: what do we know and understand? , 2000, Breast Cancer Research.

[24]  Caryn Lerman,et al.  Genetic testing: psychological aspects and implications. , 2002, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[25]  N. Fost,et al.  An interactive computer program for educating and counseling patients about genetic susceptibility to breast cancer. , 2009, Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education.

[26]  J. Crowe Counseling by Computer: Breast Cancer Risk & Genetic Testing. , 1999 .

[27]  C. Spielberger,et al.  Measuring anxiety and anger with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI). , 1999 .

[28]  Michael J Barry,et al.  Health Decision Aids To Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Office Practice , 2002, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[29]  R. Croyle,et al.  US physicians' attitudes toward genetic testing for cancer susceptibility , 2003, American journal of medical genetics. Part A.

[30]  R. Croyle,et al.  Psychological issues in genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. , 1994, Archives of internal medicine.

[31]  E. J. Mayeaux,et al.  Rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine: a shortened screening instrument. , 1993, Family medicine.

[32]  N. Holtzman,et al.  Physicians' knowledge of genetics and genetic tests , 1993, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[33]  N. Holtzman,et al.  Incorporation of genetics in primary care practice. Will physicians do the counseling and will they be directive? , 1993, Archives of family medicine.

[34]  N. Holtzman,et al.  Toward the 21st Century: Incorporating Genetics Into Primary Health Care , 1997 .

[35]  V. Strecher,et al.  Interactive multimedia and risk communication. , 1999, Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.

[36]  D. Berry,et al.  Probability of carrying a mutation of breast-ovarian cancer gene BRCA1 based on family history. , 1997, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[37]  F. Collins,et al.  Shattuck lecture--medical and societal consequences of the Human Genome Project. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[38]  M. Skolnick,et al.  Statement of the American Society of Clinical Oncology : Genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. Commentaries , 1996 .

[39]  A. Howell,et al.  Perception of risk in women with a family history of breast cancer. , 1993, British Journal of Cancer.

[40]  P. Harper,et al.  Promoting safe and effective genetic testing in the United States: Final Report of the Task Force on Genetic Testing. , 1998, Community genetics.

[41]  Julian Peto,et al.  Identification of the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2 , 1996, Nature.

[42]  G. Annas,et al.  Generic consent for genetic screening. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[43]  Michael J. Green Commentary: Computers and Genetic Counseling—Time for a Dialogue? , 2000, Journal of Genetic Counseling.

[44]  A. O'Connor A Call to Standardize Measures for Judging the Efficacy of Interventions to Aid Patients' Decision Making , 1999, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[45]  Katrina Armstrong,et al.  Interest in BRCA1/2 testing in a primary care population. , 2002, Preventive medicine.

[46]  B. Biesecker,et al.  Education about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: patient preferences for a computer program or genetic counselor. , 2001, American journal of medical genetics.

[47]  Benjamin S. Wilfond,et al.  Cancer Genetic Susceptibility Testing: Ethical and Policy Implications for Future Research and Clinical Practice , 1997, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics.

[48]  J. Cooksey THE GENETIC COUNSELOR WORKFORCE , 2000 .

[49]  C. Spielberger,et al.  Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory , 1970 .

[50]  C. Isaacs,et al.  Impact of BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation testing on psychologic distress in a clinic-based sample. , 2002, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[51]  M. Talamonti,et al.  Society of Surgical Oncology: Statement on Genetic Testing for Cancer Susceptibility , 1999, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[52]  N. Weinstein Unrealistic optimism about susceptibility to health problems: Conclusions from a community-wide sample , 1987, Journal of Behavioral Medicine.

[53]  C. Spielberger Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) (Form Y , 1983 .

[54]  A. Cull,et al.  The use of videotaped information in cancer genetic counselling: a randomized evaluation study. , 1998, British Journal of Cancer.

[55]  Steven E. Bayer,et al.  A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1. , 1994, Science.