Advertisement

Journal of Genetic Counseling

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 515–525 | Cite as

Successful Use of Peer Educators for Sharing Genetic Information

  • Vickie L. VenneEmail author
  • Heidi A. Hamann
Original Research

This study examined the impact of a genetics education module provided by Reach to Recovery peer volunteers. Participants included 113 women with confirmed breast cancer diagnoses. Eighty-eight of these women (78%) completed a baseline survey, participated in a peer-led intervention, and completed a follow-up survey. Approximately half of the women received an education module that included a genetic component, while the other half did not. Results indicated that women who received the genetics module had greater increases in genetics knowledge than the group that did not receive the module. However, follow-up interest in genetic testing was not significantly different between the two groups. Results indicate that a peer-led genetics module can increase knowledge about genetics. However, it does not appear to have a differential effect on genetic testing interest.

KEY WORDS:

breast cancer peer education genetics genetics knowledge 

Notes

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Dr. Robert Croyle and Dr. Ken R. Smith for their guidance in designing the study and reviewing the data. Thanks also go to Barbara Alexander from the American Cancer Society, Dr. Saundra Buys, and Lisa Wadge from Huntsman Cancer Institute for helping develop the modules. Jackie McCowan did a fabulous job with the illustrations – her pictures were worth a thousand words. A huge thank you to the seven Reach to Recovery volunteers who conducted the interventions and the many other women who participated in this study. This study was supported by a National Cancer Institute RO3 grant to Vickie L. Venne (CA70610).

REFERENCES

  1. Ardern-Jones, A., Kenen, R., & Eeles, R. (2005). Too much, too soon? Patients and health professionals’ views concerning the impact of genetic testing at the time of breast cancer diagnosis in women under the age of 40. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl), 14, 272–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong, K., Calzone, K., Stopfer, J., Fitzgerald, G., Coyne, J., & Weber, B. (2000). Factors associated with decisions about clinical BRCA1/2 testing. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 9, 1251–1254.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bluman, L. G., Rimer, B. K., Berry, D. A., Borstelmann, N., Iglehart, J. D., Regan, K., Schildkraut, J., & Winer, E. P. (1999). Attitudes, knowledge, and risk perceptions of women with breast and/or ovarian cancer considering testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2. J Clin Oncol, 17, 1040–1046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bowen, D. J., Burke, W., Yasui, Y., McTiernan, A., & McLeran, D. (2002). Effects of risk counseling on interest in breast cancer genetic testing for lower risk women. Genet Med, 4, 359–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowen, D. J., Kuniyuki, A., Shattuck, A., Nixon, D. W., & Sponzo, R. W. (2000). Results of a volunteer program to conduct dietary intervention research for women. Ann Behav Med, 22, 94–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brain, K., Gray, J., Norman, P., Parsons, E., Clarke, A., Rogers, C., Mansel, R., & Harper, P. (2000). Why do women attend familial breast cancer clinics? J Med Genet, 37, 197–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Burke, W., Culver, J. O., Bowen, D., Lowry, D., Durfy, S., McTiernan, A., & Andersen, M. R. (2000). Genetic counseling for women with an intermediate family history of breast cancer. Am J Med Genet, 90, 361–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Derose, K. P., Hawes-Dawson, J., Fox, S. A., Maldonado, N., Tatum, A., & Kington, R. (2000). Dealing with diversity: Recruiting churches and women for a randomized trial of mammography promotion. Health Educ Behav, 27, 632–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fennell, R. (1993). A review of evaluations of peer education programs. J Am Coll Health, 41, 251–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fernandez, B. M., Crane, L. A., Baxter, J., Gallagher, K., & McClung, M. W. (2001). Physician referral patterns to a breast cancer support program. Cancer Pract, 9, 169–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ford, D., Easton, D. F., Bishop, D. T., Narod, S. A., & Goldgar, D. E. (1994). Risks of cancer in BRCA1-mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium. Lancet, 343, 692–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Geller, G., Doksum, T., Bernhardt, B. A., & Metz, S. A. (1999). Participation in breast cancer susceptibility testing protocols: Influence of recruitment source, altruism, and family involvement on women's decisions. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 8, 377–383.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Green, M. J., Peterson, S. K., Baker, M. W., Harper, G. R., Friedman, L. C., Rubinstein, W. S., & Mauger, D. T. (2004). Effect of a computer-based decision aid on knowledge, perceptions, and intentions about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility: A randomized controlled trial. Jama, 292, 442–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hallowell, N., Murton, F., Statham, H., Green, J. M., & Richards, M. P. (1997). Women's need for information before attending genetic counselling for familial breast or ovarian cancer: A questionnaire, interview, and observational study. Bmj, 314, 281–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Horowitz, M., Wilner, N., & Alvarez, W. (1979). Impact of Event Scale: A measure of subjective stress. Psychosom Med, 41, 209–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoskins, K. F., Stopfer, J. E., Calzone, K. A., Merajver, S. D., Rebbeck, T. R., Garber, J. E., & Weber, B. L. (1995). Assessment and counseling for women with a family history of breast cancer. A guide for clinicians. Jama, 273, 577–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Iglehart, J. D., Miron, A., Rimer, B. K., Winer, E. P., Berry, D., & Shildkraut, M. J. (1998). Overestimation of hereditary breast cancer risk. Ann Surg, 228, 375–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lerman, C., Biesecker, B., Benkendorf, J. L., Kerner, J., Gomez-Caminero, A., Hughes, C., & Reed, M. M. (1997). Controlled trial of pretest education approaches to enhance informed decision-making for BRCA1 gene testing. J Natl Cancer Inst, 89, 148–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lerman, C., Narod, S., Schulman, K., Hughes, C., Gomez-Caminero, A., Bonney, G., Gold, K., Trock, B., Main, D., Lynch, J., Fulmore, C., Snyder, C., Lemon, S. J., Conway, T., Tonin, P., Lenoir, G., & Lynch, H. (1996). BRCA1 testing in families with hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. A prospective study of patient decision making and outcomes [see comments]. Jama, 275, 1885–1892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ludman, E. J., Curry, S. J., Hoffman, E., & Taplin, S. (1999). Women's knowledge and attitudes about genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility. Eff Clin Pract, 2, 158–162.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. MacDonald, D. J., Sarna, L., Uman, G. C., Grant, M., & Weitzel, J. N. (2005). Health beliefs of women with and without breast cancer seeking genetic cancer risk assessment. Cancer Nurs, 28, 372–379; quiz 380-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Meiser, B., Butow, P. N., Barratt, A. L., Schnieden, V., Gattas, M., Kirk, J., Gaff, C., Suthers, G., & Tucker, K. (2001). Long-term outcomes of genetic counseling in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer. Patient Educ Couns, 44, 215–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Monnin, S., Schiller, M. R., Sachs, L., & Smith, A. M. (1993). Nutritional concerns of women with breast cancer. J Cancer Educ, 8, 63–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Patenaude, A. F., Dorval, M., DiGianni, L. S., Schneider, K. A., Chittenden, A., & Garber, J. E. (2006). Sharing BRCA1/2 test results with first-degree relatives: factors predicting who women tell. J Clin Oncol, 24, 700–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Phelps, C., Platt, K., France, L., Gray, J., & Iredale, R. (2004). Delivering information about cancer genetics via letter to patients at low and moderate risk of familial cancer: A pilot study in Wales. Fam Cancer, 3, 55–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Reding, D. J., Fischer, V., Gunderson, P., & Lappe, K. (1995). Skin cancer prevention: A peer education model. Wis Med J, 94, 77–81.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Rinehart, M. E. (1994). The Reach to Recovery program. Cancer, 74, 372–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Schmidt, S., Becher, H., & Chang-Claude, J. (1998). Breast cancer risk assessment: Use of complete pedigree information and the effect of misspecified ages at diagnosis of affected relatives. Hum Genet, 102, 348–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Slattery, M. L., Berry, T. D., & Kerber, R. A. (1993). Is survival among women diagnosed with breast cancer influenced by family history of breast cancer? Epidemiology, 4, 543–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sloane, B. C., & Zimmer, C. G. (1993). The power of peer health education. J Am Coll Health, 41, 241–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Starkey, F., Moore, L., Campbell, R., Sidaway, M., & Bloor, M. (2005). Rationale, design and conduct of a comprehensive evaluation of a school-based peer-led anti-smoking intervention in the UK: The ASSIST cluster randomised trial [ISRCTN55572965]. BMC Public Health, 5, 43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tessaro, I., Borstelmann, N., Regan, K., Rimer, B. K., & Winer, E. (1997). Genetic testing for susceptibility to breast cancer: findings from women's focus groups. J Womens Health, 6, 317–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Willits, M. J. (1994). Role of “Reach to Recovery” in breast cancer. Cancer, 74, 2172–2173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Huntsman Cancer InstituteUniversity of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyWashington State UniversityPullmanUSA
  3. 3.High Risk Cancer ClinicsHuntsman Cancer Institute, University of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA

Personalised recommendations