3.8 Article

Improving follow up after predictive testing in Huntington's disease: evaluating a genetic counselling narrative group session

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY GENETICS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 47-58

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s12687-019-00416-9

关键词

Huntington's; Narrative; Predictive testing; Psychosocial adjustment

资金

  1. European Huntington's Disease Network
  2. University of Manchester

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recently updated Huntington's disease (HD) predictive testing guidelines emphasise clinicians' responsibility to facilitate emotional support following testing, regardless of the result. Yet models of post-test counselling support are poorly defined. Moreover, it is unclear how these might be best delivered. In this project, a genetic counsellor and clinical psychologist developed standalone group sessions using collective narrative practices for individuals post-predictive testing. Here we present an evaluation of the experiences of one group of six people who have tested mutation positive for HD and remain pre-symptomatic. Two partners also attended the session. Observations, evaluation forms and telephone interviews were used in data collection. Interview data was available from five mutation-positive individuals and one partner. Qualitative data were analysed using a thematic framework approach. Responses were overwhelmingly positive, emphasising the importance of a specifically arranged time and space to share experiences in a structured way. This was typically the first time participants had spoken openly with someone in their situation. Narrative facilitation of discussion encouraged participants to re-discover their strengths and resiliences, with similar experiences being discovered through connections with others. The evaluation was successful in implementing group narrative interventions as part of the predictive test counselling support for Huntington's disease. Participants suggested that the approach could be extended and adopted for other genetic conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据