Zierhut, Heather

AbstractDespite the pivotal role of communication skills in genetic counseling, communication strategies employed by genetic counselors in their current practice remain largely unexplored. The field of genetic counseling could benefit from updated simulated genetic counseling sessions conducted by genetic counselors illustrating a diversity of skills. This paper outlines the development and evaluation of updated simulations used to develop an online training course to identify genetic counseling skills and to assess how commonly these skills are used. Practicing genetic counselors in the United States were recruited to counsel trained standardized patients across six pretest and posttest simulated sessions in cancer, prenatal, and cardiology genetics settings. Sessions were coded using the novel Genetic Counseling Skills Checklist to identify which communication and counseling skills were utilized. Standardized patients were asked to provide session quality ratings and written feedback, which were analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis, respectively. Results from 64 recorded sessions involving 20 counselors from a variety of training programs, racial and ethnic backgrounds, states of residence, and with varying years of clinical experience revealed utilization of a broad array of skills across specialty types and clinical indications. The total number of unique skills used varied widely from 12 to 49, with an average of 35.8 out of 56 possible skills checked per session. Differences in skill usage were observed between pretest and posttest sessions. Standardized patient comments were predominantly positive with a focus on information delivery and empathetic responses. Perceptions of areas of improvement were giving less information, having clearer delivery, and expressing more empathy. This work led to the creation of a training course showcasing various skills used by practicing genetic counselors, which summarizes commonly used skills and other promising but less frequently utilized ones.

AbstractMonitoring and blunting are coping styles that characterize how people respond when faced with personally threatening situations. High monitors tend to pay more attention to, scan for, and amplify threatening cues; high blunters tend to avoid information and seek distractions when faced with a threatening event. This study sought to investigate possible differential effects of monitoring and blunting coping styles on information preferences in a hypothetical cancer diagnosis scenario in the adult general public of Minnesota. In a survey administered at a large public venue (2016 Minnesota State Fair), participants were asked to imagine they carried a gene mutation and were diagnosed with colon cancer. They indicated their information preference [modified Cassileth Information Styles Questionnaire (MCISQ)], completed two coping style measures [Miller Behavioral Style Scale (MBSS) and Threatening Medical Situations Inventory (TMSI)], rated their perceived severity of colon cancer (low, moderate, high), and answered demographic questions. Eight hundred fifty‐five individuals provided usable data. Participants classified as monitors on the TMSI had significantly higher MCISQ scores (i.e., preferred more information) than those classified as blunters (p = .004). Those scoring high on monitoring and low on blunting on the MBSS preferred significantly more information than those scoring high on both monitoring and blunting (p = .04). Linear regression analysis revealed being a monitor (TMSI), scoring high on monitoring (MBSS), rating colon cancer as more severe, and having a higher education level were significant positive predictors of MCISQ scores. Results suggest individual differences in coping style, perceived severity, and education level affect desire for information. Genetic counselors should consider these patient characteristics (e.g., asking patients about their information preferences) and tailor their approaches accordingly.