A systematic review of theory-informed strategies used in interventions fostering family genetic risk communication

• Type of Material: Article
• Authors: Jingsong Zhao, Emory University; Yue Guan, Emory University; Colleen McBride, Emory University
• Language: English
• Date: 2022-06-10
• Publisher: ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
• Publication Version: Author Accepted Manuscript (After Peer Review)
• Copyright Statement: © 2024 Elsevier B.V
• License: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International
• Final Published Version (URL): http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2022.03.009
• Title of Journal or Parent Work: PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
• Volume: 105
• Issue: 7
• Start Page: 1953
• End Page: 1962
• Grant/Funding Information: The systematic review is supported by the National Cancer Institute grant U01CA240581–02.
• Keywords: KNOWLEDGE; CLINICAL MANAGEMENT; Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary; Hereditary conditions; Family communication; HEREDITARY BREAST; RELATIVES; Life Sciences & Biomedicine; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; INFORMATION; Public, Environmental & Occupational Health; Cancer prevention; Genetic risk; Social Sciences - Other Topics; COUNSELEES; Science & Technology; LYNCH-SYNDROME; BREAST-OVARIAN-CANCER; POPULATION; Theory; Social Sciences
• Research Categories: Health Sciences, Mental Health; Education, Social Sciences; Psychology, Behavioral

Abstract

Background: Inherited risk is a family issue. Identifying family members who carry a pathogenic genetic variant that increases risk of cancers and other chronic diseases can be lifesaving for those affected. Objective: The research questions are: (1) which family communication frameworks have been applied, (2) how do intervention strategies employed map to these theories, and (3) to what extent were families receptive to these strategies and communication increased? Methods: Manuscripts published between January 2010 and August 2020 were searched in three databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Results: Nine intervention trials were identified. All interventions were evaluated in clinical genetic counseling contexts using at least one individual-level strategy (e.g. increase knowledge). Only three focused on dyadic conversations such as preparing for relatives’ information needs. Conclusions: This systematic review posed the question whether theoretically based approaches have been applied to foster family genetic risk communication. Greater attention needs to be paid to the utilization of dyadic level and family system level theories to guide intervention developments. Practical implications: We conclude by calling for accelerating and broadening the development of interventions to enable family communication about inherited risk that are theory-based, incorporate family-systems thinking, and are conducted outside of specialty clinic settings.