Joseph Galen, Pasick Rena J, Schillinger Dean, Luce Judith, Guerra Claudia, Cheng Janice Ka Yan
Department of Anthropology, History & Social Medicine, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, 1450 3rd Street, Rm 551, San Francisco, CA, 94143, USA.
Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
J Genet Couns. 2017 Oct;26(5):1090-1104. doi: 10.1007/s10897-017-0089-4. Epub 2017 Mar 13.
As genetics and genomics become part of mainstream Medicine, these advances have the potential to reduce or exacerbate health disparities. Gaps in effective communication (where all parties share the same meaning) are widely recognized as a major contributor to health disparities. The purpose of this study was to examine GC-patient communication in real time, to assess its effectiveness from the patient perspective, and then to pilot intervention strategies to improve the communication. We observed 64 English-, 35 Spanish- and 25 Chinese-speaking (n = 124) public hospital patients and 10 GCs in 170 GC appointments, and interviewed 49 patients who were offered testing using the audio recordings to stimulate recall and probe specific aspects of the communication. Data analyses were conducted using grounded theory methods and revealed a fundamental mismatch between the information provided by GCs and the information desired and meaningful to patients. Several components of the communication that contributed to this mismatch and often resulted in ineffective communication included: (1) too much information; (2) complex terminology and conceptually difficult presentation of information; (3) information perceived as not relevant by the patient; (4) unintentional inhibition of patient engagement and question-asking; (5) vague discussions of screening and prevention recommendations. Our findings indicate a need to transform the standard model of genetic counseling communication using evidence-based principles and strategies from other fields of Medicine. The high rates of limited health literacy in the US, increasing access of diverse populations to genetic services, and growing complexity of genetic information have created a perfect storm. If not directly addressed, this convergence is likely to exacerbate health disparities in the genomic age.
随着遗传学和基因组学成为主流医学的一部分,这些进展有可能减少或加剧健康差距。有效沟通方面的差距(即各方理解相同含义)被广泛认为是导致健康差距的主要因素。本研究的目的是实时观察基因咨询师(GC)与患者之间的沟通,从患者角度评估其有效性,然后试行干预策略以改善沟通。我们在170次基因咨询预约中观察了124名患者(64名说英语、35名说西班牙语、25名说中文)和10名基因咨询师,并采访了49名接受检测的患者,利用录音来唤起回忆并探究沟通的具体方面。数据分析采用扎根理论方法,结果显示基因咨询师提供的信息与患者期望和认为有意义的信息之间存在根本不匹配。导致这种不匹配并常常导致沟通无效的沟通要素包括:(1)信息过多;(2)术语复杂且信息呈现概念性强;(3)患者认为信息不相关;(4)无意抑制患者参与和提问;(5)对筛查和预防建议的讨论模糊。我们的研究结果表明,需要运用医学其他领域基于证据的原则和策略来转变基因咨询沟通的标准模式。美国健康素养有限的比例很高,不同人群获得基因服务的机会增加,以及基因信息日益复杂,这些因素共同构成了一场完美风暴。如果不直接解决,这种情况可能会加剧基因组时代的健康差距。