A randomized trial of a prenatal genetic testing interactive computerized information aid.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
The aim of this study was to determine whether an interactive computer program could improve patient knowledge regarding genetic screening and diagnostic concepts.Methods
In this randomized trial, women 6-26 weeks' gestation were assigned to standard care with provider-based counseling or to augmented counseling with an interactive computer program. The computer-based tool conveyed information about genetic testing options. Women were administered a 23-item test of content knowledge immediately and 2-4 weeks after exposure. Test scores were compared between groups at both points using T-tests.Results
A total of 150 women were randomized equally between groups. Groups were similar with regard to demographic characteristics. Women randomized to the interactive tool correctly answered a significantly greater proportion of questions than those who received standard counseling (69.4% ± 14.2% vs. 46.0% ± 15.2%, p < 0.001) on the immediate questionnaire. One hundred and twenty-three (82%) participants participated in the follow-up test. Women randomized to the tool continued to correctly answer a significantly greater proportion of questions (60.6% ± 16% vs. 49.7% ± 18.9%, p = 0.001). Education, health literacy, electronic health literacy, and other discussions with providers were not associated with a differential benefit from the educational intervention.Conclusion
A patient-directed interactive computer program may help providers to convey relevant information about genetic screening and diagnostic concepts.
SUBMITTER: Yee LM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4043849 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A randomized trial of a prenatal genetic testing interactive computerized information aid.
Yee Lynn M LM Wolf Michael M Mullen Rebecca R Bergeron Ashley R AR Cooper Bailey Stacy S Levine Robert R Grobman William A WA
Prenatal diagnosis 20140318 6
<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study was to determine whether an interactive computer program could improve patient knowledge regarding genetic screening and diagnostic concepts.<h4>Methods</h4>In this randomized trial, women 6-26 weeks' gestation were assigned to standard care with provider-based counseling or to augmented counseling with an interactive computer program. The computer-based tool conveyed information about genetic testing options. Women were administered a 23-item test of cont ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of a contraceptive decision aid in reducing decisional conflict among women seeking reversible contraception.Study designWe conducted a randomized trial of a computer-based decision aid compared to a control group for women presenting for reversible contraception at two clinics affiliated with an academic medical center. The primary outcome was change in decisional conflict, measured before and after the healthcare visit using the validated Decisional Conflict Scale. We hypothesized the decision aid would reduce the decisional conflict score by 10 points on a 100-point scale (0 = no conflict, 100 = high conflict) compared to the control group. Secondary outcomes included contraceptive method chosen and satisfaction with the healthcare visit.ResultsWe enrolled and randomized 253 women, and 241 had complete data for our primary outcome. Overall, pre-visit decisional conflict scores were low, reflecting low levels of decisional conflict in our sample; median score 15 (range 0-80) in the decision aid and 10 (0-85) in the control group (p = 0.45). Both groups had a similar reduction in median decisional conflict after the healthcare visit: -10 (-80 to 25) and -10 (-60 to 5) in the decision aid and control groups respectively (p = 0.99). Choice of contraception (p = 0.23) and satisfaction with healthcare provider (p = 0.79) also did not differ by study group.ConclusionsDecisional conflict around contraception was low in both groups at baseline. Use of a computerized contraceptive decision aid did not reduce decisional conflict, alter method choice, or impact satisfaction compared to the control group among women choosing reversible contraception.ImplicationsUse of a computerized contraceptive decision aid did not reduce decisional conflict or alter method choice compared to the control group among women choosing reversible contraception. Future studies could focus on testing the decision aid in different clinical settings, especially where barriers to providing comprehensive contraceptive counseling exist.
| S-EPMC7821473 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportancePrenatal genetic testing guidelines recommend providing patients with detailed information to allow informed, preference-based screening and diagnostic testing decisions. The effect of implementing these guidelines is not well understood.ObjectiveTo analyze the effect of a decision-support guide and elimination of financial barriers to testing on use of prenatal genetic testing and decision making among pregnant women of varying literacy and numeracy levels.Design, setting, and participantsRandomized trial conducted from 2010-2013 at prenatal clinics at 3 county hospitals, 1 community clinic, 1 academic center, and 3 medical centers of an integrated health care delivery system in the San Francisco Bay area. Participants were English- or Spanish-speaking women who had not yet undergone screening or diagnostic testing and remained pregnant at 11 weeks' gestation (n = 710).InterventionsA computerized, interactive decision-support guide and access to prenatal testing with no out-of-pocket expense (n = 357) or usual care as per current guidelines (n = 353).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was invasive diagnostic test use, obtained via medical record review. Secondary outcomes included testing strategy undergone, and knowledge about testing, risk comprehension, and decisional conflict and regret at 24 to 36 weeks' gestation.ResultsWomen randomized to the intervention group, compared with those randomized to the control group, were less likely to have invasive diagnostic testing (5.9% vs 12.3%; odds ratio [OR], 0.45 [95% CI, 0.25-0.80]) and more likely to forgo testing altogether (25.6% vs 20.4%; OR, 3.30 [95% CI, 1.43-7.64], reference group screening followed by invasive testing). Women randomized to the intervention group also had higher knowledge scores (9.4 vs 8.6 on a 15-point scale; mean group difference, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.34-1.31]) and were more likely to correctly estimate the amniocentesis-related miscarriage risk (73.8% vs 59.0%; OR, 1.95 [95% CI, 1.39-2.75]) and their estimated age-adjusted chance of carrying a fetus with trisomy 21 (58.7% vs 46.1%; OR, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.22-2.28]). Significant differences did not emerge in decisional conflict or regret.Conclusions and relevanceFull implementation of prenatal testing guidelines using a computerized, interactive decision-support guide in the absence of financial barriers to testing resulted in less test use and more informed choices. If validated in additional populations, this approach may result in more informed and preference-based prenatal testing decision making and fewer women undergoing testing.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00505596.
| S-EPMC4445462 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe have shown in a randomized controlled trial that a computerized patient decision aid (P-DA) improves medical knowledge and reduces decisional conflict, in early stage papillary thyroid cancer patients considering adjuvant radioactive iodine treatment. Our objectives were to examine the relationship between participants' baseline information preference style and the following: 1) quantity of detailed information obtained within the P-DA, and 2) medical knowledge.MethodsWe randomized participants to exposure to a one-time viewing of a computerized P-DA (with usual care) or usual care alone. In pre-planned secondary analyses, we examined the relationship between information preference style (Miller Behavioural Style Scale, including respective monitoring [information seeking preference] and blunting [information avoidance preference] subscale scores) and the following: 1) the quantity of detailed information obtained from the P-DA (number of supplemental information clicks), and 2) medical knowledge. Spearman correlation values were calculated to quantify relationships, in the entire study population and respective study arms.ResultsIn the 37 P-DA users, high monitoring information preference was moderately positively correlated with higher frequency of detailed information acquisition in the P-DA (r = 0.414, p = 0.011). The monitoring subscale score weakly correlated with increased medical knowledge in the entire study population (r = 0.268, p = 0.021, N = 74), but not in the respective study arms. There were no significant associations with the blunting subscale score.ConclusionsIndividual variability in information preferences may affect the process of information acquisition from computerized P-DA's. More research is needed to understand how individual information preferences may impact medical knowledge acquisition and decision-making.
| S-EPMC4474358 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To determine if implementing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnosis and treatment guidelines in a clinical decision support system would result in better care, including higher rates of adherence to clinical care guidelines.We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial in which we compared diagnosis and management of ADHD in 6- to 12-year-olds after implementation of a computer decision support system in 4 practices.Eighty-four charts were reviewed. In the control group, the use of structured diagnostic assessments dropped from 50% in the baseline period to 38% in the intervention period. In the intervention group, however, it rose from 60% to 81%. This difference was statistically significant, even after controlling for age, gender, and race (odds ratio of structured diagnostic assessment in intervention group versus control group = 8.0, 95% confidence interval 1.6-40.6). Significant differences were also seen in the number of ADHD core symptoms noted at the time of diagnosis. Our study was not powered to detect changes in care and management, but the percent of patients who had documented medication adjustments, mental health referrals, and visits to mental health specialists were higher in the intervention group than the control.The introduction of a clinical decision support module resulted in higher quality of care with respect to ADHD diagnosis including a prospect for higher quality of ADHD management in children. Future work will examine how to further develop the ADHD module and add support for other chronic conditions.
| S-EPMC3876764 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo assess whether knowledge following use of a decision aid (DA) for aneuploidy screening and testing is inferior to knowledge in women who saw a genetic counselor (GC) only.MethodsThis is a randomized controlled noninferiority trial of pregnant women at ≤22 weeks. Women who were scheduled for GC were randomly allocated to use a DA before GC or to GC alone. The primary outcome was knowledge score, comparing women who had used the DA only to those who saw GC alone. Analysis was by intent to treat.ResultsBetween January and October 2017, 197 women were randomized, 105 to GC only and 92 to DA use before GC. Demographics and baseline knowledge were similar between groups. Mean knowledge score following DA use was not inferior to mean knowledge score following GC only (10.4 vs. 10.6, p = 0.306). Decisional conflict was similar following completion of the DA to following GC only, but was reduced following completion of both the DA and GC compared with GC only (0.22 vs. 1.74, p = 0.003).ConclusionKnowledge surrounding aneuploidy screening in women who used a DA was not inferior to knowledge in women who underwent GC. Use of the DA in addition to GC reduced decisional conflict.
| S-EPMC6417985 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDevelopmental delays and disabilities are common in children. Research has indicated that intervention during the early years of a child's life has a positive effect on cognitive development, social skills and behavior, and subsequent school performance.ObjectiveTo determine whether a computerized clinical decision support system is an effective approach to improve standardized developmental surveillance and screening (DSS) within primary care practices.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cluster randomized clinical trial performed in 4 pediatric clinics from June 1, 2010, through December 31, 2012, children younger than 66 months seen for primary care were studied.InterventionsWe compared surveillance and screening practices after adding a DSS module to an existing computer decision support system.Main outcomes and measuresThe rates at which children were screened for developmental delay.ResultsMedical records were reviewed for 360 children (180 each in the intervention and control groups) to compare rates of developmental screening at the 9-, 18-, or 30-month well-child care visits. The DSS module led to a significant increase in the percentage of patients screened with a standardized screening tool (85.0% vs 24.4%, P < .001). An additional 120 records (60 each in the intervention and control groups) were reviewed to examine surveillance rates at visits outside the screening windows. The DSS module led to a significant increase in the percentage of patients whose parents were assessed for concerns about their child's development (71.7% vs 41.7%, P = .04).Conclusions and relevanceUsing a computerized clinical decision support system to automate the screening of children for developmental delay significantly increased the numbers of children screened at 9, 18, and 30 months of age. It also significantly improved surveillance at other visits. Moreover, it increased the number of children who ultimately were diagnosed as having developmental delay and who were referred for timely services at an earlier age.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01351077.
| S-EPMC10157652 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBy providing information on the relative merits and potential harms of the options available and a framework to clarify preferences, decision aids can improve knowledge and realistic expectations and decrease decisional conflict in individuals facing decisions between alternative forms of action. Decision-making about prenatal testing for fetal abnormalities is often confusing and difficult for women and the effectiveness of decision aids in this field has not been established. This study aims to test whether a decision aid for prenatal testing of fetal abnormalities, when compared to a pamphlet, improves women's informed decision-making and decreases decisional conflict.Methods/designA cluster designed randomised controlled trial is being conducted in Victoria, Australia. Fifty General Practitioners (GPs) have been randomised to one of two arms: providing women with either a decision aid or a pamphlet. The two primary outcomes will be measured by comparing the difference in percentages of women identified as making an informed choice and the difference in mean decisional conflict scores between the two groups. Data will be collected from women using questionnaires at 14 weeks and 24 weeks gestation. The sample size of 159 women in both arms of the trial has been calculated to detect a difference of 18% (50 to 68%) in informed choice between the two groups. The required numbers have been adjusted to accommodate the cluster design, miscarriage and participant lost--to--follow up. Baseline characteristics of women will be summarised for both arms of the trial. Similarly, characteristics of GPs will be compared between arms. Differences in the primary outcomes will be analysed using 'intention-to-treat' principles. Appropriate regression techniques will adjust for the effects of clustering and include covariates to adjust for the stratifying variable and major potential confounding factors.DiscussionThe findings from this trial will make a significant contribution to improving women's experience of prenatal testing and will have application to a variety of maternity care settings. The evaluation of a tailored decision aid will also have implications for pregnancy care providers by identifying whether or not such a resource will support their role in providing prenatal testing information.
| S-EPMC1479329 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRequiring personalized genetic counseling may introduce barriers to cancer risk assessment, but it is unknown whether omitting counseling could increase distress.ObjectiveTo assess whether omitting pretest and/or posttest genetic counseling would increase distress during remote testing.Design, setting, and participantsMaking Genetic Testing Accessible (MAGENTA) was a 4-arm, randomized noninferiority trial testing the effects of individualized pretest and/or posttest genetic counseling on participant distress 3 and 12 months posttest. Participants were recruited via social and traditional media, and enrollment occurred between April 27, 2017, and September 29, 2020. Participants were women aged 30 years or older, English-speaking, US residents, and had access to the internet and a health care professional. Previous cancer genetic testing or counseling was exclusionary. In the family history cohort, participants had a personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer. In the familial pathogenic variant (PV) cohort, participants reported 1 biological relative with a PV in an actionable cancer susceptibility gene. Data analysis was performed between December 13, 2020, and May 31, 2023.InterventionParticipants completed baseline questionnaires, watched an educational video, and were randomized to 1 of 4 arms: the control arm with pretest and/or posttest genetic counseling, or 1 of 3 study arms without pretest and posttest counseling. Genetic counseling was provided by phone appointments and testing was done using home-delivered saliva kits.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was participant distress measured by the Impact of Event Scale 3 months after receiving the results. Secondary outcomes included completion of testing, anxiety, depression, and decisional regret.ResultsA total of 3839 women (median age, 44 years [range 22-91 years]), most of whom were non-Hispanic White and college educated, were randomized, 3125 in the family history and 714 in the familial PV cohorts. In the primary analysis in the family history cohort, all experimental arms were noninferior for distress at 3 months. There were no statistically significant differences in anxiety, depression, or decisional regret at 3 months. The highest completion rates were seen in the 2 arms without pretest counseling.Conclusions and relevanceIn the MAGENTA clinical trial, omitting individualized pretest counseling for all participants and posttest counseling for those without PV during remote genetic testing was not inferior with regard to posttest distress, providing an alternative care model for genetic risk assessment.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02993068.
| S-EPMC10502696 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrenatal genetic testing is an essential part of routine prenatal care. Yet, obstetricians often lack the time to provide comprehensive prenatal genetic testing education to their patients. Pregnant women lack prenatal genetic testing knowledge, which may hinder informed decision-making during their pregnancies. Due to the rapid growth of technology, mobile apps are a potentially valuable educational tool through which pregnant women can learn about prenatal genetic testing and improve the quality of their communication with obstetricians. The characteristics, quality, and number of available apps containing prenatal genetic testing information are, however, unknown.ObjectiveThis study aims to conduct a firstreview to identify, evaluate, and summarize currently available mobile apps that contain prenatal genetic testing information using a systematic approach.MethodsWe searched both the Apple App Store and Google Play for mobile apps containing prenatal genetic testing information. The quality of apps was assessed based on the criteria adopted from two commonly used and validated mobile app scoring systems, including the Mobile Application Rating Scale (MARS) and the APPLICATIONS evaluation criteria.ResultsA total of 64 mobile apps were identified. Of these, only 2 apps were developed for a specific prenatal genetic test. All others were either pregnancy-related (61/64, 95%) or genetics-related (1/64, 2%) apps that provided prenatal genetic testing information. The majority of the apps (49/64, 77%) were developed by commercial companies. The mean quality assessment score of the included apps was 13.5 (SD 2.9), which was equal to the average of possible theoretical score. Overall, the main weaknesses of mobile apps in this review included the limited number of prenatal genetic tests mentioned; incomprehensiveness of testing information; unreliable and missing information sources; absence of developmental testing with users (not evidence based); high level of readability; and the lack of visual information, customization, and a text search field.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that the quality of mobile apps with prenatal genetic testing information must be improved and that pregnant women should be cautious when using these apps for prenatal genetic testing information. Obstetricians should carefully examine mobile apps before referring any of them to their patients for use as an educational tool. Both improving the quality of existing mobile apps, and developing new, evidence-based, high-quality mobile apps targeting all prenatal genetic tests should be the focus of mobile app developers going forward.
| S-EPMC8554671 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is pressing need to develop and evaluate clinically sound approaches to supporting the engagement between patients who have inherited cancer susceptibility and their relatives who may share it. Identifying and engaging patients with an inherited cancer susceptibility in the community is a potentially powerful strategy to reduce the gap in genetic risk evaluation for their families. The goal of the Genetic Information and Family Testing (GIFT) Study is to engage patients about inherited cancer susceptibility and provide support and services to their relatives to initiate genetic risk evaluation (including choice of home genetic testing).Methods/designWe are conducting a population-based, 2 × 2 factorial cluster-randomized clinical trial to implement and evaluate a direct-to-family, virtual, personalized, family-centered communication and decision-making tool: the Family Genetic Health Program. We use a unique SEER-based data infrastructure that we pioneered to identify patients diagnosed with cancer in the states of Georgia and California who carry a pathogenic variant (PV) in clinically tested cancer susceptibility gene. Eligible patients are offered enrollment into the trial and can invite their eligible first- and second-degree relatives to enroll. The index subject is randomized, and relatives are then cluster randomized by family. Participants in all arms receive some level of intervention, including at least the web-based platform with information about genetic testing and, for the relatives, an option to receive genetic testing through the study platform. We study the effects of two intervention design features: (1) the level of personalized family genetic risk navigation support: a technology-assisted, personally tailored patient and family member education and communication tool vs. the tool plus direct assistance from a lay human navigator); and (2) the cost of the genetic test offered to the relatives ($50 vs. free).DiscussionGIFT is a blueprint for how a virtual cascade genetic risk program can be delivered in the community, through a population-based approach to patients and relatives in families with hereditary cancer syndromes. The vision, experiences, and findings from GIFT will inform next-generation implementation science and the results will pertain to stakeholders interested in a population-based approach to cascade genetic risk evaluation.Trial registrationNCT05552664 registered at Clincaltrials.gov September 20, 2022.
| S-EPMC11869684 | biostudies-literature