Decision role preferences for return of results from genome sequencing amongst young breast cancer patients. Issue 1 (January 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Matsen, Cindy B.; Lyons, Sarah; Goodman, Melody S.; Biesecker, Barbara B.; Kaphingst, Kimberly A.
• Is Part Of: Patient education and counseling. Volume 102:Issue 1(2019)
• Page Start: 155
• Page End: 161
• Publication Date: 2019-01
• Subjects: Breast cancer -- BRCA -- Genetic knowledge -- Advanced genetic testing -- Decision making -- Decision role preferences; Patient education -- Periodicals; Health counseling -- Periodicals; Health education -- Periodicals; Counseling -- Periodicals; Patient Education -- Periodicals; Éducation des patients -- Périodiques; Counseling -- Périodiques; Éducation sanitaire -- Périodiques; 615.5071
• DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2018.08.004
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0738-3991

Abstract

Highlights: Availability and use of whole genome sequencing is expanding. Patients prefer different roles when deciding what results to receive. There is no consistent variable that predicts what role a person prefers. Abstract: Objective: To better understand decision role preferences in women diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age for return of results of genome sequencing in research and clinical settings. Methods: Participants were surveyed about communication and decision-making preferences related to genome sequencing results and factors that may affect these preferences. The primary outcome was decision role preference (Control Preference Scale) for selecting what results to receive within medical care or within a research study. Results: For results returned as part of medical care, most patients preferred a collaborative (N = 481, 45%) or active (N = 488, 45%) role with only 107 (10%) choosing a passive role. When making the decision as part of a research study, most patients preferred an active role (N = 617, 57%), 350 (33%) choosing a collaborative role, and110 (10%) choosing a passive role. Conclusion: Most women in this study preferred to share in decision making. Participants had somewhat different role preferences for clinical and research contexts, with greater preference for active roles in the research context. Practice Implications: We advocate for practice guidelines that incorporate discussion of decision role as an integral part of patient centered care and shared decision-making and recognize that more work is needed to inform guidelines.