‘Steep learning curves’ to ‘Smooth Sailing’: A reappraisal of telegenetics amidst the COVID‐19 pandemic

Abstract

The COVID‐19 pandemic has pushed medical providers to trial telemedicine on a scale that lacks precedent. In genetic medicine, nearly overnight genetics providers were asked to transition to telemedicine platforms, irrespective of their previous experience with these modalities. This push to telegenetics prompted a reappraisal of the practice, as genetics providers learned firsthand about the feasibility, benefits, and drawbacks of telegenetics and telesupervision, all of which raise questions about the potential incorporation of these platforms beyond the pandemic. Adding to nascent literature on the transition to telegenetics amidst the COVID‐19 pandemic, we aimed to evaluate provider experiences and preferences with respect to telegenetics through qualitative semi‐structured interviews with genetics providers. Nineteen providers from seven institutions participated in a semi‐structured interview focused on the rapid shift to telegenetics, the benefits and drawbacks of the practice, experiences supervising students on virtual platforms, and providers’ preferences. We employed a qualitative methodology so that providers working across diverse subspecialties could expand upon previously reported benefits and drawbacks. Qualitative data revealed the nuanced benefits of telegenetics which included overcoming geographic, spatial, and temporal barriers to care as well as greater involvement of patients’ family members in sessions. In addition, the data indicated drawbacks related to additional tasks such as completing paperwork electronically and facilitating the collection of specimens from patients’ homes. Interviews with providers from different subspecialties revealed how telegenetics may be uniquely useful for particular subspecialties, patient populations, or clinics for whom the aforementioned barriers are more significant. Providers reported that telesupervision made the provision of feedback to students more cumbersome and identified a number of methods for enriching the telesupervision experience. In keeping with previous research, most genetics providers appraised telegenetics as a valuable addition to patient care (68%, N = 13) and hoped to offer it as an option beyond the pandemic (63%, N = 12).

An examination of psychosocial and professional effects of the COVID‐19 pandemic on genetic counselors

“…Like a number of other studies, the current findings demonstrate multiple dichotomies (Mills et al, 2021; Mueller et al, 2021; Rezich et al, 2021; Uhlmann et al, 2021). Nearly half (45%) of participants felt it was more difficult to balance their personal and professional lives, while 23% felt it was easier to balance the two.…”

“…Overall, this study recapitulates data regarding changes to professional aspects of genetic counseling practice since the spring of 2020 and elaborates on previously identified non‐professional challenges experienced by genetic counselors (Bergstrom et al, 2021; MacFarlane et al, 2021; Mauer et al, 2021; Mills et al, 2021; Mueller et al, 2021; Pan et al, 2021; Rezich et al, 2021; Shannon et al, 2021; Turchetti et al, 2021; Wessels et al, 2021). As many of the qualitative responses showed, however, the distinction between professional and non‐professional aspects of life for genetic counselors can be ambiguous.…”

A call for unity in DEIJ efforts using a proposed framework for Education, Recruitment, Retainment, Research, and Active outreach (ERA) for genetic counselors in the United States

“…Hiring and educating staff from the community (veterans, multilingual speakers, and the elderly) support healthcare/community relationships. Additionally, the access provided by telehealth increases engagement while allowing participants to maintain their personal schedule (Bradbury et al., 2016; Mueller et al., 2021). The more time and effort invested in building the relationship between researchers and the local community paves the path for more inclusive, personalized medicine and improved outcomes (Burhansstipanov et al., 2005; Hamel et al., 2016).…”