TY - JOUR
T1 - Genetic Counseling Assistants
T2 - an Integral Piece of the Evolving Genetic Counseling Service Delivery Model
AU - Pirzadeh-Miller, Sara
AU - Robinson, Linda S.
AU - Read, Parker
AU - Ross, Theodora S.
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors would like to thank Beth Crawford, MS, CGC and the University of California San Francisco for their collaboration on this project, as well as Sarah Pass, BS for her significant contribution to grant writing and preparation. Dr. Xian-Jie Xin and Jillian Huang assisted in the statistical analysis of this project.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016, National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc.
PY - 2017/8/1
Y1 - 2017/8/1
N2 - This study explores the potential impact of the genetic counseling assistant (GCA) position on the efficiency of the genetic counseling field, evaluates attitudes regarding expansion of the genetic counseling field to include the GCA, and presents data on GCA endeavors and GCA job tasks as reported by GCAs, certified genetic counselors (CGCs), and program directors (PDs). Data on GCA roles and attitudes toward different aspects of the GCA position were collected via surveys of CGCs who have worked with GCAs, PDs who have and have not had experience with GCAs in their programs, and GCAs. We analyzed responses from 63 individuals: 27 PDs, 22 CGCs, and 14 GCAs. GCAs’ impact on efficiency was calculated via internal analysis of genetic patient volume per genetic counselor within the University of Texas Southwestern (UTSW) patient database prior to, and since the addition of, a GCA to the practice. The response rates for PDs, CGCs, and GCAs were 27 %, 79 %, and 61 %, respectively. Every CGC stated the GCA increased their efficiency. CGCs with a GCA reported a 60 % average increase in patient volume. This figure was congruent with internal data from the UTSW cancer genetics program (58.5 % increase). Appropriate responsibilities for GCAs as reported by CGCs and PDs (>90 %) include: data entry, shipping tests, administrative tasks, research, and ordering supplies. Regarding GCAs delivering test results, there was response variation whether this should be a job duty: 42 % of CGCs agreed to GCAs delivering negative results to patients, compared to 22 % of program directors. Twenty-two percent of PDs expressed concern about the job title “Genetic Counseling Assistant.” Ninety percent of CGCs felt that GCA was a career path to becoming a CGC, compared to 42 % of PDs. Eighty-three percent of GCAs who decided to apply to CGC graduate programs were accepted. We conclude the addition of a GCA to a genetic counseling practice contributes to increased efficiency and is one way to expand the reach of the profession.
AB - This study explores the potential impact of the genetic counseling assistant (GCA) position on the efficiency of the genetic counseling field, evaluates attitudes regarding expansion of the genetic counseling field to include the GCA, and presents data on GCA endeavors and GCA job tasks as reported by GCAs, certified genetic counselors (CGCs), and program directors (PDs). Data on GCA roles and attitudes toward different aspects of the GCA position were collected via surveys of CGCs who have worked with GCAs, PDs who have and have not had experience with GCAs in their programs, and GCAs. We analyzed responses from 63 individuals: 27 PDs, 22 CGCs, and 14 GCAs. GCAs’ impact on efficiency was calculated via internal analysis of genetic patient volume per genetic counselor within the University of Texas Southwestern (UTSW) patient database prior to, and since the addition of, a GCA to the practice. The response rates for PDs, CGCs, and GCAs were 27 %, 79 %, and 61 %, respectively. Every CGC stated the GCA increased their efficiency. CGCs with a GCA reported a 60 % average increase in patient volume. This figure was congruent with internal data from the UTSW cancer genetics program (58.5 % increase). Appropriate responsibilities for GCAs as reported by CGCs and PDs (>90 %) include: data entry, shipping tests, administrative tasks, research, and ordering supplies. Regarding GCAs delivering test results, there was response variation whether this should be a job duty: 42 % of CGCs agreed to GCAs delivering negative results to patients, compared to 22 % of program directors. Twenty-two percent of PDs expressed concern about the job title “Genetic Counseling Assistant.” Ninety percent of CGCs felt that GCA was a career path to becoming a CGC, compared to 42 % of PDs. Eighty-three percent of GCAs who decided to apply to CGC graduate programs were accepted. We conclude the addition of a GCA to a genetic counseling practice contributes to increased efficiency and is one way to expand the reach of the profession.
KW - Genetic clinic efficiency
KW - Genetic counseling assistant
KW - Genetic counseling profession
KW - Genetic counselor
KW - Service delivery
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994744820&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84994744820&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10897-016-0039-6
DO - 10.1007/s10897-016-0039-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 27832509
AN - SCOPUS:84994744820
SN - 1059-7700
VL - 26
SP - 716
EP - 727
JO - Journal of Genetic Counseling
JF - Journal of Genetic Counseling
IS - 4
ER -