Deborah A Hall, Marc Rosenbaum, Jacob Hawkins, Bichun Ouyang, Christa Cooper, Neepa Patel
{"title":"亨廷顿病基因检测远程遗传咨询随机试验。","authors":"Deborah A Hall, Marc Rosenbaum, Jacob Hawkins, Bichun Ouyang, Christa Cooper, Neepa Patel","doi":"10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The purpose of the study was to determine the feasibility and patient satisfaction of telegenetic counseling, or counseling done by video, for Huntington disease (HD). Background: Genetic counseling is necessary for presymptomatic or symptomatic HD genetic testing, but the lack of access to counseling because of geography or expense is a critical gap for many patients. The hypothesis of this study was that there would be no difference in patient satisfaction between telegenetic counseling (tele-GC) or in-person counseling (in-person GC) for HD testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective, randomized, unblinded study of either tele-GC or in-person GC for HD gene testing. Participants had standardized genetic counseling in the clinic or through a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) appropriate telemedicine platform first and then crossed over. A study coordinator interviewed the participant using a telehealth survey after each encounter.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 19 in-person GC and 15 tele-GC participants were included: 68% women, 41 ± 15 years, 80% White, 10% Hispanic, and +CAG repeat length = 45 ± 4.4 (n = 15) (<i>p</i> > 0.1). All participants were satisfied with their initial counseling experience when asked to rate on a scale of 1-10 (median 10/10, <i>p</i> = 0.94). The majority of symptomatic HD participants (5/7) preferred in-person GC. The main advantage of tele-GC was reduction in travel time for both in-person GC first (n = 16) and tele-GC first (n = 11) participants. Technical challenges were encountered in many of the participants. Visually seeing the genetic counselor improved understanding for in-person GC (n = 10) and tele-GC (n = 8) participants. Participants felt they were able to pick up on emotional cues (n = 33) and felt comfortable asking questions (n = 34) using the tele-GC format.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Telegenetic counseling is a feasible option for HD gene testing, if patients are able to overcome technical issues. Having a video visit with both audio and video components, rather than an audio-only phone call, should be considered when using telegenetic counseling for HD. Finally, in-person counseling may be preferred to increase understanding of the genetic counseling materials in patients, especially in motor manifest HD.</p>","PeriodicalId":19136,"journal":{"name":"Neurology. Clinical practice","volume":"15 1","pages":"e200394"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515112/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Randomized Trial of Telegenetic Counseling for Gene Testing in Huntington Disease.\",\"authors\":\"Deborah A Hall, Marc Rosenbaum, Jacob Hawkins, Bichun Ouyang, Christa Cooper, Neepa Patel\",\"doi\":\"10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200394\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>The purpose of the study was to determine the feasibility and patient satisfaction of telegenetic counseling, or counseling done by video, for Huntington disease (HD). Background: Genetic counseling is necessary for presymptomatic or symptomatic HD genetic testing, but the lack of access to counseling because of geography or expense is a critical gap for many patients. The hypothesis of this study was that there would be no difference in patient satisfaction between telegenetic counseling (tele-GC) or in-person counseling (in-person GC) for HD testing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective, randomized, unblinded study of either tele-GC or in-person GC for HD gene testing. Participants had standardized genetic counseling in the clinic or through a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) appropriate telemedicine platform first and then crossed over. A study coordinator interviewed the participant using a telehealth survey after each encounter.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 19 in-person GC and 15 tele-GC participants were included: 68% women, 41 ± 15 years, 80% White, 10% Hispanic, and +CAG repeat length = 45 ± 4.4 (n = 15) (<i>p</i> > 0.1). All participants were satisfied with their initial counseling experience when asked to rate on a scale of 1-10 (median 10/10, <i>p</i> = 0.94). The majority of symptomatic HD participants (5/7) preferred in-person GC. The main advantage of tele-GC was reduction in travel time for both in-person GC first (n = 16) and tele-GC first (n = 11) participants. Technical challenges were encountered in many of the participants. Visually seeing the genetic counselor improved understanding for in-person GC (n = 10) and tele-GC (n = 8) participants. Participants felt they were able to pick up on emotional cues (n = 33) and felt comfortable asking questions (n = 34) using the tele-GC format.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Telegenetic counseling is a feasible option for HD gene testing, if patients are able to overcome technical issues. Having a video visit with both audio and video components, rather than an audio-only phone call, should be considered when using telegenetic counseling for HD. Finally, in-person counseling may be preferred to increase understanding of the genetic counseling materials in patients, especially in motor manifest HD.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neurology. Clinical practice\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"e200394\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515112/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neurology. Clinical practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200394\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurology. Clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000200394","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景和目的:本研究旨在确定亨廷顿病(HD)的电报遗传咨询(即通过视频进行的咨询)的可行性和患者满意度。背景:亨廷顿病(HD)的遗传咨询是一项非常必要的工作:遗传咨询对于症状前或有症状的亨廷顿氏病遗传检测是必要的,但由于地理位置或费用原因,许多患者无法获得遗传咨询,这是一个关键的缺口。本研究的假设是,在 HD 检测中,远程遗传咨询(telegenetic counseling,tele-GC)和面对面遗传咨询(in-person counseling,in-person GC)在患者满意度方面没有差异:这是一项前瞻性、随机、非盲法研究,研究对象是进行 HD 基因检测的远程遗传咨询或亲临现场遗传咨询的患者。参与者首先在诊所或通过符合《健康保险流通与责任法案》(HIPAA)的远程医疗平台接受标准化遗传咨询,然后进行交叉咨询。每次会面后,研究协调员都会通过远程医疗调查对参与者进行访谈:共纳入了 19 名面对面 GC 和 15 名远程 GC 参与者:68%为女性,41 ± 15 岁,80%为白人,10%为西班牙裔,+CAG 重复长度 = 45 ± 4.4(n = 15)(p > 0.1)。所有参与者都对他们最初的咨询经历表示满意,评分标准为 1-10 分(中位数为 10/10,P = 0.94)。大多数有症状的人类免疫缺陷病毒感染者(5/7)更喜欢面对面的 GC。远程 GC 的主要优势在于减少了首次面对面 GC(16 人)和首次远程 GC(11 人)参与者的旅行时间。许多参与者都遇到了技术难题。亲眼看到遗传咨询师提高了面对面遗传咨询(10 人)和远程遗传咨询(8 人)参与者的理解能力。参与者认为他们能够捕捉到情感线索(33 人),并对使用远程遗传咨询形式提问感到舒适(34 人):讨论:如果患者能够克服技术问题,远程遗传咨询是进行 HD 基因检测的可行选择。在使用 HD 基因检测远程咨询时,应考虑使用包含音频和视频内容的视频访问,而不是仅有音频的电话。最后,为增加患者对遗传咨询材料的理解,尤其是对运动表现型 HD 患者而言,当面咨询可能是首选。
Randomized Trial of Telegenetic Counseling for Gene Testing in Huntington Disease.
Background and objectives: The purpose of the study was to determine the feasibility and patient satisfaction of telegenetic counseling, or counseling done by video, for Huntington disease (HD). Background: Genetic counseling is necessary for presymptomatic or symptomatic HD genetic testing, but the lack of access to counseling because of geography or expense is a critical gap for many patients. The hypothesis of this study was that there would be no difference in patient satisfaction between telegenetic counseling (tele-GC) or in-person counseling (in-person GC) for HD testing.
Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, unblinded study of either tele-GC or in-person GC for HD gene testing. Participants had standardized genetic counseling in the clinic or through a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) appropriate telemedicine platform first and then crossed over. A study coordinator interviewed the participant using a telehealth survey after each encounter.
Results: A total of 19 in-person GC and 15 tele-GC participants were included: 68% women, 41 ± 15 years, 80% White, 10% Hispanic, and +CAG repeat length = 45 ± 4.4 (n = 15) (p > 0.1). All participants were satisfied with their initial counseling experience when asked to rate on a scale of 1-10 (median 10/10, p = 0.94). The majority of symptomatic HD participants (5/7) preferred in-person GC. The main advantage of tele-GC was reduction in travel time for both in-person GC first (n = 16) and tele-GC first (n = 11) participants. Technical challenges were encountered in many of the participants. Visually seeing the genetic counselor improved understanding for in-person GC (n = 10) and tele-GC (n = 8) participants. Participants felt they were able to pick up on emotional cues (n = 33) and felt comfortable asking questions (n = 34) using the tele-GC format.
Discussion: Telegenetic counseling is a feasible option for HD gene testing, if patients are able to overcome technical issues. Having a video visit with both audio and video components, rather than an audio-only phone call, should be considered when using telegenetic counseling for HD. Finally, in-person counseling may be preferred to increase understanding of the genetic counseling materials in patients, especially in motor manifest HD.
期刊介绍:
Neurology® Genetics is an online open access journal publishing peer-reviewed reports in the field of neurogenetics. The journal publishes original articles in all areas of neurogenetics including rare and common genetic variations, genotype-phenotype correlations, outlier phenotypes as a result of mutations in known disease genes, and genetic variations with a putative link to diseases. Articles include studies reporting on genetic disease risk, pharmacogenomics, and results of gene-based clinical trials (viral, ASO, etc.). Genetically engineered model systems are not a primary focus of Neurology® Genetics, but studies using model systems for treatment trials, including well-powered studies reporting negative results, are welcome.