Predictive genetic testing for Huntington's disease: Exploring participant experiences of uncertainty and ambivalence between clinic appointments

Author:

Ballard L. M.1ORCID,Doheny S.2ORCID,Dimond R.3ORCID,Lucassen A. M.14ORCID,Clarke A. J.2ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Clinical Ethics, Law & Society (CELS), Primary Care, Population Sciences and Medical Education Aldermoor Health Centre, Aldermoor Close Southampton UK

2. Institute of Medical Genetics, Division of Cancer & Genetics School of Medicine, Cardiff University Cardiff UK

3. School of Social Science Cardiff University Cardiff Wales UK

4. Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics University of Oxford Oxford UK

Abstract

AbstractAmbivalence and uncertainty are key themes throughout the psychology of healthcare literature. This is especially so for individuals at risk of Huntington's disease (HD) deliberating the decision to undergo genetic testing because there is currently no treatment that modifies disease progression. A better understanding of the experience of making a decision about genetic prediction will help practitioners support and guide individuals through this process. Our aim was to capture participants' experiences of uncertainty and ambivalence in between their genetic counseling appointments. We explored these issues through the experiences of nine participants who were referred for predictive HD testing at four regional genetics services in England and Wales. Data consisted of recordings of clinic consultations, diaries, and an in‐depth interview conducted at the end of the testing process. Data were analyzed thematically. Four themes were identified representing four possible futures, each future dependent on the decision to undergo testing and the result of that test. Our results showed that participants, as well as attending more to a future that represents their current situation of not having undergone predictive testing, also attended more to a distant future where a positive predictive result is received and symptoms have started. Participants attended less to the two futures that were more immediate once testing was undertaken (a future where a positive result is received and symptoms have not started and a future where a negative result is received). The use of diaries gave us a unique insight into these participants' experiences of ambivalence and uncertainty, psychological distress, and the emotional burden experienced. These findings help inform discussions within the clinic appointment as well as encourage researchers to consider diary use as a method of exploring what happens for individuals outside of clinical encounters.

Funder

Economic and Social Research Council

Publisher

Wiley

Reference40 articles.

1. American Psychological Association. (2023).APA dictionary of psychology. Retrieved fromhttps://dictionary.apa.org/ambivalence

2. Ballard L. M.(2020).Wellbeing of psychologists during Covid‐19: Impact on research. British Psychological Society. Retrieved fromhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8DGEW16GZ4&t=232s

3. Using thematic analysis in psychology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3