Cohen Stephanie A, Marvin Monica L, Riley Bronson D, Vig Hetal S, Rousseau Julie A, Gustafson Shanna L
Cancer Genetics Risk Assessment Program, St. Vincent Hospital, 8301 Harcourt Rd #100, Indianapolis, IN 46260, USA.
J Genet Couns. 2013 Aug;22(4):411-21. doi: 10.1007/s10897-013-9588-0. Epub 2013 Apr 25.
Increasing demand for genetic services has resulted in the need to evaluate current service delivery models (SDMs) and consider approaches that improve access to and efficiency of genetic counseling (GC). This study aimed to describe SDMs currently used by the GC community. The NSGC membership was surveyed regarding the use of four SDMs: in-person GC, telephone GC, group GC, and telegenetics GC. Variables related to access and components of use were also surveyed, including: appointment availability, time-per-patient, number of patients seen, billing, and geographic accessiblity. Seven hundred one usable responses were received. Of these, 54.7 % reported using an in-person SDM exclusively. The remainder (45.3 %) reported using multiple SDMs. Telephone, group and telegenetics GC were used often or always by 8.0 %, 3.2 % and 2.2 % of respondents, respectively. Those using an in-person SDM reported the ability to see the highest number of patients per week (p < 0.0001) and were the most likely to bill in some manner (p < 0.0001). Those using telegenetic and telephone GC served patients who lived the furthest away, with 48.3 % and 35.8 %% respectively providing GC to patients who live >4 h away. This study shows that genetic counselors are incorporating SDMs other than traditional in-person genetic counseling, and are utilizing more than one model. These adaptations show a trend toward shorter wait time and shorter length of appointments. Further study is indicated to analyze benefits and limitations of each individual model and factors influencing the choice to adopt particular models into practice.
对基因服务需求的不断增加,使得有必要评估当前的服务提供模式(SDMs),并考虑改善基因咨询(GC)的可及性和效率的方法。本研究旨在描述基因咨询界目前使用的服务提供模式。对国家基因咨询协会(NSGC)的成员就四种服务提供模式的使用情况进行了调查:面对面基因咨询、电话基因咨询、团体基因咨询和远程基因咨询。还调查了与可及性和使用组成部分相关的变量,包括:预约的可获得性、每位患者的时间、接待的患者数量、计费和地理可及性。共收到701份有效回复。其中,54.7%报告仅使用面对面的服务提供模式。其余(45.3%)报告使用多种服务提供模式。分别有8.0%、3.2%和2.2%的受访者经常或总是使用电话、团体和远程基因咨询。使用面对面服务提供模式的人报告每周能接待的患者数量最多(p < 0.0001),并且最有可能以某种方式计费(p < 0.0001)。使用远程基因咨询和电话基因咨询的人服务的患者居住距离最远,分别有48.3%和35.8%为居住距离超过4小时路程的患者提供基因咨询。本研究表明,基因咨询师正在采用传统面对面基因咨询以外的服务提供模式,并且使用不止一种模式。这些调整显示出等待时间和预约时长缩短的趋势。需要进一步研究以分析每种模式的益处和局限性,以及影响在实践中采用特定模式的选择的因素。