Recall of and Reactions to a Surgeon Referral Letter for BRCA Genetic Counseling Among High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients
Background The oncology care setting represents an important opportunity to identify and refer women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. However, little is known about the effectiveness of provider approaches to inform patients of hereditary cancer risk or patient uptake of g...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Annals of surgical oncology 2009-07, Vol.16 (7), p.1973-1981 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1981 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | 1973 |
container_title | Annals of surgical oncology |
container_volume | 16 |
creator | Vadaparampil, Susan T. Quinn, Gwendolyn P. Miree, Cheryl A. Brzosowicz, Jennifer Carter, Bradford Laronga, Christine |
description | Background
The oncology care setting represents an important opportunity to identify and refer women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. However, little is known about the effectiveness of provider approaches to inform patients of hereditary cancer risk or patient uptake of genetic counseling (GC). This qualitative study examined the impact of a surgeon referral letter on recently diagnosed breast cancer patients’ uptake of
BRCA
GC.
Methods
Qualitative open-ended, in-depth interviews were conducted with 26 high-risk breast cancer patients sent a referral letter for
BRCA
GC by their surgeon. Data were analyzed by a grounded theory approach.
Results
Most women (~80%) recalled receiving the letter, and 62% of all (
n
= 16) women pursued GC. Recall of the letter did not seem to be associated with uptake of GC (
P
= .49, Fisher’s exact test). The results highlight key areas for improvement that may help increase the impact of the letter. Half of the women in this sample believed that the letter was sent to all breast cancer patients, rather than those with specific risk factors. Few women mentioned any implications for the information obtained during GC or testing regarding their current breast cancer diagnosis or treatment. Of the women who did not attend, many perceived that dealing with the GC and testing process in the midst of a cancer diagnosis and treatment was overwhelming. Among the women who had chosen not to attend GC, most stated they would reconsider after completing their treatment.
Conclusions
Patient recall of a surgeon referral letter does not seem to increase the number of high-risk women who attend GC after a breast cancer diagnosis. The letter approach in its current format does not seem to be a wholly effective means of communicating with some patients who may be overwhelmed by their cancer diagnosis or unaware that GC and testing may have implications for their current treatment decisions, possibly resulting in a missed opportunity to engage in informed decision making. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1245/s10434-009-0479-4 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67370668</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1746295321</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-f3261f76e7502e1a8f7c12762a4b5b2011566f8aeefe4a2274171195b68dcbb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkV1rFDEUhoMo9ssf4I0EL7wbm5PJx8zldtC2sFDZ9j5ksifr1NmkJhnEf2_KLhQE8SYJJ8_7nnN4CXkP7DNwIS8zMNGKhrG-YUL3jXhFTkHWilAdvK5vprqm50qekLOcHxkD3TL5lpxAL1jHRHdKfm3Q2Xmm0VMbtnSD1pUphkxLpJbeL2mHMdSyx5TsTNdYCibqY6JXm2FFrzFgmRwd4hIyzlPY0dU-1vNm2n1vNlP-Qa8S2lzoYIOrym-2TBhKviBvvJ0zvjve5-Th65eH4aZZ313fDqt14wRjpfEtV-C1Qi0ZR7Cd1w64VtyKUY6cAUilfGexDigs51qABujlqLqtG8f2nHw62D6l-HPBXMx-yg7n2QaMSzZKt5op1f0X5ExL2UpdwY9_gY9xSaHuYGr7tu2FhgrBAXIp5pzQm6c07W36bYCZ5-jMITpTozPP0RlRNR-Oxsu4x-2L4phVBfgByPUr7DC9dP636x_Q-6I2</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>227339471</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Recall of and Reactions to a Surgeon Referral Letter for BRCA Genetic Counseling Among High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Vadaparampil, Susan T. ; Quinn, Gwendolyn P. ; Miree, Cheryl A. ; Brzosowicz, Jennifer ; Carter, Bradford ; Laronga, Christine</creator><creatorcontrib>Vadaparampil, Susan T. ; Quinn, Gwendolyn P. ; Miree, Cheryl A. ; Brzosowicz, Jennifer ; Carter, Bradford ; Laronga, Christine</creatorcontrib><description>Background
The oncology care setting represents an important opportunity to identify and refer women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. However, little is known about the effectiveness of provider approaches to inform patients of hereditary cancer risk or patient uptake of genetic counseling (GC). This qualitative study examined the impact of a surgeon referral letter on recently diagnosed breast cancer patients’ uptake of
BRCA
GC.
Methods
Qualitative open-ended, in-depth interviews were conducted with 26 high-risk breast cancer patients sent a referral letter for
BRCA
GC by their surgeon. Data were analyzed by a grounded theory approach.
Results
Most women (~80%) recalled receiving the letter, and 62% of all (
n
= 16) women pursued GC. Recall of the letter did not seem to be associated with uptake of GC (
P
= .49, Fisher’s exact test). The results highlight key areas for improvement that may help increase the impact of the letter. Half of the women in this sample believed that the letter was sent to all breast cancer patients, rather than those with specific risk factors. Few women mentioned any implications for the information obtained during GC or testing regarding their current breast cancer diagnosis or treatment. Of the women who did not attend, many perceived that dealing with the GC and testing process in the midst of a cancer diagnosis and treatment was overwhelming. Among the women who had chosen not to attend GC, most stated they would reconsider after completing their treatment.
Conclusions
Patient recall of a surgeon referral letter does not seem to increase the number of high-risk women who attend GC after a breast cancer diagnosis. The letter approach in its current format does not seem to be a wholly effective means of communicating with some patients who may be overwhelmed by their cancer diagnosis or unaware that GC and testing may have implications for their current treatment decisions, possibly resulting in a missed opportunity to engage in informed decision making.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1068-9265</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1534-4681</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1245/s10434-009-0479-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 19408048</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Adult ; Attitude to Health ; Breast Neoplasms - genetics ; Breast Neoplasms - psychology ; Breast Neoplasms - surgery ; Breast Neoplasms - therapy ; Breast Oncology ; Communication ; Female ; Genes, BRCA1 ; Genes, BRCA2 ; Genetic Counseling - psychology ; Humans ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Oncology ; Patient Acceptance of Health Care ; Patient Education as Topic ; Physician-Patient Relations ; Referral and Consultation ; Surgery ; Surgical Oncology</subject><ispartof>Annals of surgical oncology, 2009-07, Vol.16 (7), p.1973-1981</ispartof><rights>Society of Surgical Oncology 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-f3261f76e7502e1a8f7c12762a4b5b2011566f8aeefe4a2274171195b68dcbb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-f3261f76e7502e1a8f7c12762a4b5b2011566f8aeefe4a2274171195b68dcbb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1245/s10434-009-0479-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1245/s10434-009-0479-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,27907,27908,41471,42540,51302</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19408048$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Vadaparampil, Susan T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quinn, Gwendolyn P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miree, Cheryl A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brzosowicz, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carter, Bradford</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laronga, Christine</creatorcontrib><title>Recall of and Reactions to a Surgeon Referral Letter for BRCA Genetic Counseling Among High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients</title><title>Annals of surgical oncology</title><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><description>Background
The oncology care setting represents an important opportunity to identify and refer women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. However, little is known about the effectiveness of provider approaches to inform patients of hereditary cancer risk or patient uptake of genetic counseling (GC). This qualitative study examined the impact of a surgeon referral letter on recently diagnosed breast cancer patients’ uptake of
BRCA
GC.
Methods
Qualitative open-ended, in-depth interviews were conducted with 26 high-risk breast cancer patients sent a referral letter for
BRCA
GC by their surgeon. Data were analyzed by a grounded theory approach.
Results
Most women (~80%) recalled receiving the letter, and 62% of all (
n
= 16) women pursued GC. Recall of the letter did not seem to be associated with uptake of GC (
P
= .49, Fisher’s exact test). The results highlight key areas for improvement that may help increase the impact of the letter. Half of the women in this sample believed that the letter was sent to all breast cancer patients, rather than those with specific risk factors. Few women mentioned any implications for the information obtained during GC or testing regarding their current breast cancer diagnosis or treatment. Of the women who did not attend, many perceived that dealing with the GC and testing process in the midst of a cancer diagnosis and treatment was overwhelming. Among the women who had chosen not to attend GC, most stated they would reconsider after completing their treatment.
Conclusions
Patient recall of a surgeon referral letter does not seem to increase the number of high-risk women who attend GC after a breast cancer diagnosis. The letter approach in its current format does not seem to be a wholly effective means of communicating with some patients who may be overwhelmed by their cancer diagnosis or unaware that GC and testing may have implications for their current treatment decisions, possibly resulting in a missed opportunity to engage in informed decision making.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Attitude to Health</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - genetics</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - psychology</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - surgery</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - therapy</subject><subject>Breast Oncology</subject><subject>Communication</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Genes, BRCA1</subject><subject>Genes, BRCA2</subject><subject>Genetic Counseling - psychology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Patient Acceptance of Health Care</subject><subject>Patient Education as Topic</subject><subject>Physician-Patient Relations</subject><subject>Referral and Consultation</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Oncology</subject><issn>1068-9265</issn><issn>1534-4681</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkV1rFDEUhoMo9ssf4I0EL7wbm5PJx8zldtC2sFDZ9j5ksifr1NmkJhnEf2_KLhQE8SYJJ8_7nnN4CXkP7DNwIS8zMNGKhrG-YUL3jXhFTkHWilAdvK5vprqm50qekLOcHxkD3TL5lpxAL1jHRHdKfm3Q2Xmm0VMbtnSD1pUphkxLpJbeL2mHMdSyx5TsTNdYCibqY6JXm2FFrzFgmRwd4hIyzlPY0dU-1vNm2n1vNlP-Qa8S2lzoYIOrym-2TBhKviBvvJ0zvjve5-Th65eH4aZZ313fDqt14wRjpfEtV-C1Qi0ZR7Cd1w64VtyKUY6cAUilfGexDigs51qABujlqLqtG8f2nHw62D6l-HPBXMx-yg7n2QaMSzZKt5op1f0X5ExL2UpdwY9_gY9xSaHuYGr7tu2FhgrBAXIp5pzQm6c07W36bYCZ5-jMITpTozPP0RlRNR-Oxsu4x-2L4phVBfgByPUr7DC9dP636x_Q-6I2</recordid><startdate>20090701</startdate><enddate>20090701</enddate><creator>Vadaparampil, Susan T.</creator><creator>Quinn, Gwendolyn P.</creator><creator>Miree, Cheryl A.</creator><creator>Brzosowicz, Jennifer</creator><creator>Carter, Bradford</creator><creator>Laronga, Christine</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090701</creationdate><title>Recall of and Reactions to a Surgeon Referral Letter for BRCA Genetic Counseling Among High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients</title><author>Vadaparampil, Susan T. ; Quinn, Gwendolyn P. ; Miree, Cheryl A. ; Brzosowicz, Jennifer ; Carter, Bradford ; Laronga, Christine</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-f3261f76e7502e1a8f7c12762a4b5b2011566f8aeefe4a2274171195b68dcbb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Attitude to Health</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - genetics</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - psychology</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - surgery</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - therapy</topic><topic>Breast Oncology</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Genes, BRCA1</topic><topic>Genes, BRCA2</topic><topic>Genetic Counseling - psychology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Patient Acceptance of Health Care</topic><topic>Patient Education as Topic</topic><topic>Physician-Patient Relations</topic><topic>Referral and Consultation</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Oncology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Vadaparampil, Susan T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quinn, Gwendolyn P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miree, Cheryl A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brzosowicz, Jennifer</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carter, Bradford</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laronga, Christine</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of surgical oncology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Vadaparampil, Susan T.</au><au>Quinn, Gwendolyn P.</au><au>Miree, Cheryl A.</au><au>Brzosowicz, Jennifer</au><au>Carter, Bradford</au><au>Laronga, Christine</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Recall of and Reactions to a Surgeon Referral Letter for BRCA Genetic Counseling Among High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients</atitle><jtitle>Annals of surgical oncology</jtitle><stitle>Ann Surg Oncol</stitle><addtitle>Ann Surg Oncol</addtitle><date>2009-07-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1973</spage><epage>1981</epage><pages>1973-1981</pages><issn>1068-9265</issn><eissn>1534-4681</eissn><abstract>Background
The oncology care setting represents an important opportunity to identify and refer women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. However, little is known about the effectiveness of provider approaches to inform patients of hereditary cancer risk or patient uptake of genetic counseling (GC). This qualitative study examined the impact of a surgeon referral letter on recently diagnosed breast cancer patients’ uptake of
BRCA
GC.
Methods
Qualitative open-ended, in-depth interviews were conducted with 26 high-risk breast cancer patients sent a referral letter for
BRCA
GC by their surgeon. Data were analyzed by a grounded theory approach.
Results
Most women (~80%) recalled receiving the letter, and 62% of all (
n
= 16) women pursued GC. Recall of the letter did not seem to be associated with uptake of GC (
P
= .49, Fisher’s exact test). The results highlight key areas for improvement that may help increase the impact of the letter. Half of the women in this sample believed that the letter was sent to all breast cancer patients, rather than those with specific risk factors. Few women mentioned any implications for the information obtained during GC or testing regarding their current breast cancer diagnosis or treatment. Of the women who did not attend, many perceived that dealing with the GC and testing process in the midst of a cancer diagnosis and treatment was overwhelming. Among the women who had chosen not to attend GC, most stated they would reconsider after completing their treatment.
Conclusions
Patient recall of a surgeon referral letter does not seem to increase the number of high-risk women who attend GC after a breast cancer diagnosis. The letter approach in its current format does not seem to be a wholly effective means of communicating with some patients who may be overwhelmed by their cancer diagnosis or unaware that GC and testing may have implications for their current treatment decisions, possibly resulting in a missed opportunity to engage in informed decision making.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>19408048</pmid><doi>10.1245/s10434-009-0479-4</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1068-9265 |
ispartof | Annals of surgical oncology, 2009-07, Vol.16 (7), p.1973-1981 |
issn | 1068-9265 1534-4681 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67370668 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Adult Attitude to Health Breast Neoplasms - genetics Breast Neoplasms - psychology Breast Neoplasms - surgery Breast Neoplasms - therapy Breast Oncology Communication Female Genes, BRCA1 Genes, BRCA2 Genetic Counseling - psychology Humans Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Oncology Patient Acceptance of Health Care Patient Education as Topic Physician-Patient Relations Referral and Consultation Surgery Surgical Oncology |
title | Recall of and Reactions to a Surgeon Referral Letter for BRCA Genetic Counseling Among High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T01%3A56%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Recall%20of%20and%20Reactions%20to%20a%20Surgeon%20Referral%20Letter%20for%20BRCA%20Genetic%20Counseling%20Among%20High-Risk%20Breast%20Cancer%20Patients&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20surgical%20oncology&rft.au=Vadaparampil,%20Susan%20T.&rft.date=2009-07-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1973&rft.epage=1981&rft.pages=1973-1981&rft.issn=1068-9265&rft.eissn=1534-4681&rft_id=info:doi/10.1245/s10434-009-0479-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1746295321%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=227339471&rft_id=info:pmid/19408048&rfr_iscdi=true |