ScholarWorksIndianapolis
  • Communities & Collections
  • Browse ScholarWorks
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    or
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Allison, Camille O."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    An exploration of delegation practices regarding the utilization of genetic counseling assistants for disclosure of genetic testing results
    (Wiley, 2025) Ranson, David; Allison, Camille O.; Wetherill, Leah; Delk, Paula R.; Stone, Kristyne; Medical and Molecular Genetics, School of Medicine
    Genetic counselors (GCs) play a crucial role in the healthcare system, providing education, support and guidance regarding genetic risk assessment, testing and results interpretation. To help GCs practice at the highest level of their expertise, the role of the genetic counseling assistant (GCA) was introduced, focusing on tasks like administrative support and patient care coordination. Although GCs typically handle the disclosure of test results, there is limited research on the delegation of results disclosure to GCAs. This study explores GCs' perspectives on delegating negative and variant of uncertain significance (VUS) genetic test results disclosures to GCAs. A quantitative survey was conducted among GCs practicing in the United States and Canada. Results revealed that while the majority of GCs were willing to delegate both negative and VUS results, few currently do so. Oncology GCs exhibited greater willingness and actual delegation of VUS disclosures relative to other specialties. Effective communication skills, level of genetics knowledge, and willingness to seek help were identified as the most influential attributes on GCs' confidence in GCAs' abilities to disclose test results. The most frequent concern about GCAs disclosing negative and VUS results was remaining suspicion for an underlying genetic etiology. Additionally, GCs were concerned about delegating VUS disclosures since patients more frequently struggle to understand those results. A triaging system to determine suitable results for a GCA to disclose and extensive shadowing of GCs disclosing results were proposed as methods of building GCs' confidence in the ability of a GCA to disclose test results. Ultimately, a better understanding of the discrepancy between GCs' willingness to delegate results disclosures and actual delegation practices is essential if the GCA scope of practice were to include results disclosure.
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Comparison of willingness and preference for genetic counseling via telemedicine: before vs. during the COVID-19 pandemic
    (Springer, 2022) Allison, Camille O.; Prucka, Sandra K.; Fitzgerald‑Butt, Sara M.; Helm, Benjamin M.; Lah, Melissa; Wetherill, Leah; Baud, Rebecca E.; Medical and Molecular Genetics, School of Medicine
    The COVID-19 pandemic required genetic counseling services, like most outpatient healthcare, to rapidly adopt a telemedicine model. Understanding the trends in patients' preferences for telemedicine relative to in-person service delivery both before and after the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic may aid in navigating how best to integrate telemedicine in a post-COVID-19 era. Our study explored how respondents' willingness to use, and preference for, telemedicine differed from before to after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents included patients, or their parent/guardian, seen in a general medical genetics clinic in 2018, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and in 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents were surveyed regarding their willingness to use telemedicine, preference for telemedicine relative to in-person care, and the influence of various factors. Among 69 pre-COVID-19 and 40 current-COVID-19 respondents, there was no shift in willingness to use, or preference for, telemedicine across these time periods. About half of respondents (50.6%) preferred telemedicine visits for the future. Of the 49.4% who preferred in-person visits, 79.1% were still willing to have visits via telemedicine. Predictors of these preferences included comfort with technology and prioritization of convenience of location. This study suggests that a hybrid care model, utilizing telemedicine and in-person service delivery, may be most appropriate to meet the needs of the diverse patients served. Concern for COVID-19 was not found to predict willingness or preference, suggesting that our findings may be generalizable in post-pandemic contexts.
About IU Indianapolis ScholarWorks
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy Notice
  • Copyright © 2025 The Trustees of Indiana University