Advertisement

Journal of Genetic Counseling

, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 46–57 | Cite as

An Assessment of Genetic Counseling Services for Individuals with Multiple Sclerosis

  • Stephanie Skinner
  • Colleen Guimond
  • Rachel Butler
  • Emily Dwosh
  • Anthony L. Traboulsee
  • A. Dessa SadovnickEmail author
Original Research

Abstract

Multiple sclerosis (MS) affects up to 1/500 Canadians. The University of British Columbia MS Clinic (UBC Clinic) is the only MS clinic in Canada (and likely internationally) that routinely offers genetic counseling to patients and their families. A typical session includes the collection of family history and demographic data, discussion of the inheritance of MS, interpretation of family-specific recurrence risks and psychosocial counseling. The aims of this study were to explore patients’: 1) expectations of the genetic counseling session; 2) understanding of the etiology of MS (both pre and post-session); and 3) post-session perceptions of genetic counseling. A two-part questionnaire to assess genetic counseling services was distributed before and after sessions to all consenting patients seen during the period October 1, 2008 to February 28, 2009 inclusive. Sixty-two completed questionnaires were analysed. Genetic counseling was found to significantly increase the number of individuals who were able to correctly identify the etiology of MS (p < 0.001). Patient satisfaction with genetic counseling was high, with an average satisfaction score of 32.4/35 (92.6 %). Of those who provided comments (n = 42/60) regarding the usefulness of the genetic counseling session, 95.2 % reported it useful (n = 40/42). Findings suggest that genetic counseling is effective in increasing patients’ knowledge of the etiology of MS and is viewed by patients as a useful service. Based on the high level of positive feedback regarding genetic counseling by the study sample, this study suggests that the services provided by genetic counselors may be beneficial for patients with MS seen in other centers.

Keywords

Multiple sclerosis Genetic counseling Patient perceptions Patient expectations Patient satisfaction Patient knowledge 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was funded in part by the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada Scientific Research Foundation.

This study was partial fulfillment of Stephanie Skinner’s study for a M.Sc. degree in Genetic Counseling at the University of British Columbia. The authors thank the UBC MS Clinic Neurologists (V. Devonshire, S. Hashimoto, J. Hooge, L. Kastrukoff, J. Oger, A.L. Sayao), allied professional and Support staff and especially the MS patients and their family members. The authors gratefully acknowledge the statistical support provided by Boris Kuzeljevic.

Conflict of Interest

Authors Skinner, Guimond, Butler, Dwosh, Traboulsee and Sadovnick declare that they have no conflict of interest with respect to this manuscript.

Funding and Disclosures

ALT has received grant funding from Genzyme and Roche; served on data safety monitoring board for Merck Serono and clinical trial steering committee for Roche; and received honoraria or travel grants from Teva Canada Innovation, Roche, Merck/EMD Serono, Genzyme, MedImmune and Chugai Pharmaceuticals.

ADS is a consultant for Novartis and receives travel funds and consulting fees but has no company shares; and receives travel funds, honoraria and unrestricted educational funds from Biogen Idec, Teva Neuroscience, and Merck Serono.

SS, CG, RB and ED report no disclosures.

Informed Consent

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000. Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.

References

  1. Austin, J. C., & Honer, W. G. (2008). Psychiatric genetic counseling for parents of individuals affected with psychotic disorders: a pilot study. Early Intervention in Psychiatry, 2, 80–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Benbow, C., & Koopman, W. J. (2003). Clinic-based needs assessment of individuals with multiple sclerosis and significant others: Implications for program planning—Psychological needs. Rehabilitation Nursing, 28, 109–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Black, D. A., Grant, C., Lapsley, H. M., & Rawson, G. K. (1994). The services and social needs of people with multiple sclerosis in New South Wales, Australia. Journal of Rehabilitation, 60, 60–65.Google Scholar
  4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butow, P. N., Lobb, E. A., Meiser, B., Barratt, A., & Tucker, K. M. (2003). Psychological outcomes and risk perception after genetic testing and counseling in breast cancer: a systematic review. The Medical Journal of Australia, 178, 77–81.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Carton, H., Vlietinck, R., Debruyne, J., De Keyser, J., D’Hooghe, M. B., Loos, R., et al. (1997). Risks of multiple sclerosis in relatives of patients in Flanders, Belgium. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 62, 329–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chao, M. J., Ramagopalan, S. V., Herrera, B. M., Lincoln, M. R., Dyment, D. A., Sadovnick, A. D., et al. (2009). Epigenetics in multiple sclerosis susceptibility: difference in transgenerational risk localizes to the major histocompatibility complex. Human Molecular Genetics, 18, 261–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Compston, A., & Coles, A. (2008). Multiple sclerosis. Lancet, 372, 1502–1517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Confavreux, C., Aimard, G., & Devic, M. (1980). Course and prognosis f multiple sclerosis assessed by the computerized data processing of 349 patients. Brain, 103, 281–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Pina-Neto, J. M., & Petean, E. B. L. (1999). Genetic counseling follow-up—a retrospective study with a quantitative approach. Genetics and Molecular Biology, 22, 295–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. DeMarco, T. A., Peshkin, B. N., Mars, B. D., & Tercyak, K. P. (2004). Patient satisfaction with cancer genetic counseling: a psychometric analysis of the genetic counseling satisfaction scale. Journal of Genetics Counseling, 13, 293–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dyment, D. A., Yee, I. M., Ebers, G. C., & Sadovnick, A. D. (2006). Multiple sclerosis in stepsiblings: recurrence risk and ascertainment. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 77, 258–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dyment, D. A., Cader, M. Z., Herrera, M. B., Ramagopalan, S. V., Orton, S. M., Chao, M., et al. (2007). A genome-scan in a single pedigree with a high prevalence of MS. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 52, 955–962.Google Scholar
  14. Ebers, G. C., & Sadovnick, A. D. (1994). Association studies in multiple sclerosis. Journal of Neuroimmunology, 53, 117–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ebers, G. C., Paty, D. W., Stiller, C. R., Nelson, R. F., Seland, T. P., & Larsen, B. (1982). HLA-typing in multiple sclerosis sibling pairs. Lancet, 2(8289), 88–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ebers, G. C., Sadovnick, A. D., & Risch, N. J. (1995). A genetic basis for familial aggregation in multiple sclerosis. Canadian Collaborative Study Group Nature, 377, 150–151.Google Scholar
  17. Ebers, G. C., Yee, I. M., Sadovnick, A. D., & Duquette, P. (2000). Conjugal multiple sclerosis: population-based prevalence and recurrence risks in offspring. Canadian collaborative study group. Annals of Neurology, 48, 927–931.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ebers, G. C., Sadovnick, A. D., Dyment, D. A., Yee, I. M. L., Willer, C. J., & Risch, N. (2004). Parent of origin effect in multiple sclerosis: observations in half siblings. Lancet, 363, 1773–1774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Esplen, M. J., Madlensky, L., Aronson, M., Rothenmund, M., Gallinger, S., Butler, K., et al. (2007). Colorectal cancer survivors undergoing genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: motivational factors and psychosocial functioning. Clinical Genetics, 72, 394–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Filippini, G., Del Giovane, C., Vacchi, L., D’Amico, R., Di Pietrantonj, C., Beecher, D., et al. (2013). Immunomodulators and immunosuppressants for multiple sclerosis: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008933.pub2.
  21. Forbes, A. W., While, A., & Taylor, M. (2007). What people with multiple sclerosis perceive to be important to meeting their needs. Angus Jornal of Advance Nursing, 58, 11–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fraser, L., Bramald, S., Chapman, C., Chu, C., Cornelius, V., Douglas, F., et al. (2003). What motivates interest in attending a familial cancer genetics clinic? Familial Cancer, 2, 159–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Herrera, M., Ramagopalan, S. V., Orton, S., Chao, M. J., Yee, I. M., Sadovnick, A. D., et al. (2007). Parental transmission of MS in a population-based Canadian cohort. Neurology, 69, 1208–1212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hunter, A. G., Cappelli, M., Humphreys, L., Allanson, J. E., Chiu, T. T., Peeters, C., et al. (2005). A randomized trial comparing alternative approaches to prenatal diagnosis counseling in advanced maternal age patients. Clinical Genetics, 67, 303–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. International Multiple Sclerosis Genetics Consortium (IMSGC) (2013). Analysis of immune-related loci identifies 48 new susceptibility variants for multiple sclerosis. Nat Genet. Sep 29. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2770. [Epub ahead of print].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jersild, C., Svejgaard, A., & Fog, T. (1972). HL-A antigens and multiple sclerosis. Lancet, 1, 1240–1241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jersild, C., Fog, T., Hansen, G. S., Thomsen, M., Svejgaard, A., & Dupont, B. (1973). Histocompatibility determinants in multiple sclerosis, with special reference to clinical course. Lancet, 1, 1221–1225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Julian-Reynier, C., Eisinger, F., Chabal, F., Aurran, Y., Bignon, Y. J., Nogues, C., et al. (1998). Cancer genetic clinics: why do women who already have cancer attend? European Journal of Cancer, 34, 1549–1553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kasparian, N. A., Wakefield, C. E., & Meiser, B. (2007). Assessment of psychosocial outcomes in genetic counseling research: an overview of available measurement scales. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 16, 693–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Koopman, W. J., Benbow, C. L., & Vandervoort, M. (2006). Top 10 needs of people with multiple sclerosis and their significant others. The Journal of Neuroscience Nursing, 38, 369–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ligers, A., Dyment, D. A., Willer, C. J., Sadovnick, A. D., Ebers, G., Risch, N., et al. (2001). Evidence of linkage with HLA-DR in DRB1* 15-negative families with multiple sclerosis. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 69, 900–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives de Psychologie, 140, 1–55.Google Scholar
  33. Lincoln, M. R., Ramagopalan, S. V., Dyment, D. A., Herrera, B. M., DeLuca, G. C., & Orton, S. M. (2009). Epistasis among HLA-DRB1, HLA-DQA1 and HLA-DQB1 determines multiple sclerosis susceptibility. PNAS, 106, 7542–7547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Lyus, V. L. (2007). The importance of genetic counseling for individuals with schizophrenia and their relatives: potential clients’ opinions and experiences. American Journal of Medical Genetics Part B: Neuropsychiatric Genetics, 144B, 1014–1021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Meiser, B., & Halliday, J. L. (2002). What is the impact of genetic counseling in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer? A meta-analytic review. Social Science and Medicine, 54, 1463–1470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Meiser, B., Butow, P. N., Barratt, A. L., Schnieden, V., Gattas, M., Kirk, J., et al. (2001). Long-term outcomes of genetic counseling in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer. Patient Education and Counseling, 44, 215–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada. What is MS? https://doi.org/www.mssociety.ca/en/information/ms_what.htm> (accessed October 2013).
  38. National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC), https://doi.org/nsgc.org/p/cm/ld/fid=43 (accessed October 2013).
  39. Noseworthy, J. H., Lucchinetti, C., Rodriguez, M., & Weinshenker, B. G. (2000). Multiple sclerosis. New England Journal of Medicine, 343, 938–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. O’Gorman, C., Lin, R., Stankovich, J., & Broadley, S. A. (2013). Modelling genetic susceptibility to multiple sclerosis with family data. Neuroepidemiology, 40, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. O’Gorman, C., Freeman, S., Taylor, B. V., Butzkueven, H., Australian and New Zealand MS Genetics Consortium (ANZgene), & Broadley, S. A. (2011). Familial recurrence risks for multiple sclerosis in Australia. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry, 82, 1354.Google Scholar
  42. Orton, S. M., Herrera, B. M., Yee, I. M., Valdar, V., Ramagopalan, S. V., Sadovnick, A. D., et al. (2006). Sex ratio of multiple sclerosis in Canada: a longitudinal study. Lancet Neurology, 5, 932–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Peay, H. L., Hooker, G. W., Kassem, L., & Biesecker, B. B. (2009). Family risk and related education and counseling needs: perceptions of adults with bipolar disorder and siblings of adults with bipolar disorder. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 149A, 364–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pierce, M., Hayworth, J., Warburton, F., Keen, H., & Bradley, C. (1999). Diabetes mellitus in the family: perceptions of offspring’s risk. Diabetic Medicine, 16, 431–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pierce, M., Ridout, D., Harding, D., Keen, H., & Bradley, C. (2000). More good than harm: a randomised controlled trial of the effect of education about familial risk of diabetes on psychological outcomes. British Journal of General Practice, 50, 867–871.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Quaid, K. A., Achen, S. R., Smiley, C. L., & Nurnberger, J. I. (2001). Perceived genetic risks for bipolar disorder in a patient population: an exploratory study. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 10, 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ramagopalan, S. V., Herrera, B. M., Bell, J. T., Dyment, D. A., Deluca, G. C., Lincoln, M. R., et al. (2008). Parental transmission of HLA-DRB1*15 in multiple sclerosis. Human Genetics, 122, 661–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Robertson, N. P., Fraser, M., Deans, J., Clayton, D., Walker, N., & Compston, D. A. (1996). Age-adjusted recurrence risks for relatives of patients with multiple sclerosis. Brain, 119, 449–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sadovnick, A. D., Dircks, A., & Ebers, G. C. (1999). Genetic counseling in multiple sclerosis: risks to sibs and children of affected individuals. Clinical Genetics, 56, 118–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smerecnik, C. M. R., Mesters, I., Verweijb, E., de Vries, N. K., & de Vries, H. (2009). A systematic review on the impact of genetic counseling on risk perception accuracy. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 18, 217–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Stunnenberg, H.G. & Hubner, N.C. (2013). Genomics meets proteomics: identifying the culprits in disease. Hum Genet Oct 18. [Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar
  52. Westerlind, H., Ramanujam, R., Uvehag, D., Kuja-Halkola, R., Boman, M., Bottai, M., Lichtenstein, P., Hillert, J. (2014). Modest familial risks for multiple sclerosis: a registry-based study of the population of Sweden. Brain. Jan 17. [Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar
  53. Whitelaw, C., Flett, P., & Amor, D. J. (2007). Recurrence risk in autism spectrum disorder: a study of parental knowledge. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 43, 752–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Willer, C. J., Dyment, D. A., Risch, N. J., Sadovnick, A. D., & Ebers, G. C. (2003). Twin concordance and sibling recurrence rates in multiple sclerosis. PNAS, 100, 12877–12882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Willer, C. J., Dyment, D. A., Cherny, S., Ramagopalan, S. V., Herrera, B. M., Morrison, K. M., et al. (2007). A genome-wide scan in forty large pedigrees with multiple sclerosis. Journal of Human Genetics, 52, 955–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Withrow, K. A., Burton, S., Arnos, K. S., Kalfoglou, A., & Pandya, A. (2008). Consumer motivations for pursuing genetic testing and their preferences for the provision of genetic services for hearing loss. Journal of Genetic Counseling, 17, 252–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc. 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephanie Skinner
    • 1
    • 4
  • Colleen Guimond
    • 1
    • 3
  • Rachel Butler
    • 3
    • 6
  • Emily Dwosh
    • 1
    • 3
  • Anthony L. Traboulsee
    • 2
    • 3
  • A. Dessa Sadovnick
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Medical GeneticsUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  2. 2.Division of NeurologyUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  3. 3.Multiple Sclerosis ClinicUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  4. 4.Medical Genetics ClinicUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  5. 5.Vancouver Coastal Health Authority – UBC HospitalThe University of British ColumbiaVancouverCanada
  6. 6.Olive Fertility CentreVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations