Advancing qualitative rare disease research methodology: a comparison of virtual and in-person focus group formats

Background: Rare disease research is hampered in part by the fact that patients are geographically dispersed. Rare disease patient communities are recognized for their use of the internet to learn about their condition and find peer-to-peer support. As such, web-based technologies offer promise for overcoming geographic barriers in rare disease research for many. Qualitative focus groups (FGs) are a widely used methodology used to understand patients and parents/families ‘lived experience’ and unmet needs is important to improve care for rare diseases. It is unclear if web-enabled (virtual) FGs are comparable to traditional in-person approaches. We conducted in-person (n = 3) and virtual (n = 3) FGs with rare disease patients to determine if virtual FGs produce similar results in-person FGs. Results: Three in-person (n = 33 participants) and three virtual (n = 25 participants) FGs were conducted examining attitudes and beliefs regarding genetic testing and family communication of risk. Participants included 30 males, 18 females, and 10 parents/guardians. Two independent investigators identified excerpts (meaningful sections of text) and coded themes/sub-themes using a codebook. Inter-coder agreement across identified excerpts (n = 530) in both FG formats was 844/875 (96.5%). Two additional investigators reviewed coded excerpts and did not identify additional themes/sub-themes—supporting data saturation across FG formats. Virtual FGs accounted for 303/530 (57.2%) of total excerpts and 957/1721 (55.7%) of all identified themes/sub-themes. Formats were similar in terms of overall number of excerpts (101 ± 7.8 vs. 75.7 ± 18.8, p = 0.26) and themes/sub-themes (319 ± 6.1 vs. 254.7 ± 103.6, p = 0.34) between virtual and in-person FGs. However, virtual FGs had significantly more coded excerpts specifically relating to sensitive/intimate topics including ‘attitudes and beliefs’ (n = 320 vs. n = 235, p < 0.001), ‘information and support’ (n = 184 vs. n = 99, p < 0.001), and ‘family communication’ (n = 208 vs. n = 114, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Virtual FGs yielded similar numbers of coded excerpts compared to traditional in-person FGs. Virtual FGs appear to support the relative anonymity of participants, resulting in richer discussion of highly sensitive, intimate topics. Findings support the validity and methodologic rigor of using web-enabled technologies for conducting FGs in rare diseases

The Benefits and Burdens of Pediatric Palliative Care and End-of-Life Research: A Systematic Review

Objective: The aim of this study is to report the benefits and burdens of palliative research participation on children, siblings, parents, clinicians, and researchers. Background: Pediatric palliative care requires research to mature the science and improve interventions. A tension exists between the desire to enhance palliative and end-of-life care for children and their families and the need to protect these potentially vulnerable populations from untoward burdens. Methods: Systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines with prepared protocol registered as PROSPERO #CRD42018087304. MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, Scopus, and The Cochrane Library were searched (2000–2017). English-language studies depicting the benefits or burdens of palliative care or end-of-life research participation on either pediatric patients and/or their family members, clinicians, or study teams were eligible for inclusion. Study quality was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Results: Twenty-four studies met final inclusion criteria. The benefit or burden of palliative care research participation was reported for the child in 6 papers; siblings in 2; parents in 19; clinicians in 3; and researchers in 5 papers. Benefits were more heavily emphasized by patients and family members, whereas burdens were more prominently emphasized by researchers and clinicians. No paper utilized a validated benefit/burden scale. Discussion: The lack of published exploration into the benefits and burdens of those asked to take part in pediatric palliative care research and those conducting the research is striking. There is a need for implementation of a validated benefit/burden instrument or interview measure as part of pediatric palliative and end-of-life research design and reporting

COPING, PARENTING AND DECISION MAKING FOR MOTHERS OF INFANTS RECEIVING TREATMENT FOR A CONGENITAL ANOMALY IN THE NICU

Background: A prenatal or postnatal congenital diagnosis is a known source of parental distress and disrupts parental adaptation, often to a greater degree in mothers. The purpose of this study was to explore the coping, parenting, and decision-making adaptation processes for mothers who receive a prenatal vs. postnatal congenital diagnosis for their infant who requires treatment immediately after birth in the NICU. Methods: This study utilized a cross-sectional, sequential explanatory mixed methods design. Quantitative surveys and in-depth semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with mothers faced with decision making for their infant in the NICU diagnosed with a congenital anomaly between July 2016 and January 2018. T-tests and correlations were used to analyze quantitative data, qualitative content analysis was used to analyze qualitative data, and data matrices were used to combine quantitative and qualitative data. Results: There were 37 participants in the quantitative sample (mean age 30.6 ±6.0) and 20 of these participants (mean age 31.25 ±5.73) agreed to qualitative interviews; approximately two-thirds of participants were White, 25% African American, and 10% were Hispanic. On quantitative surveys, mothers in the postnatal group demonstrated more engaged decision making (86%), compared with mothers in the prenatal group (52%). Mothers in the prenatal group utilized significantly more acceptance coping than mothers in the postnatal group (U=78; p=0.01). Parenting values among mothers in the prenatal and postnatal groups were similar; both groups placed greatest priority on the parenting values of making medical decisions and focusing on their child’s health, and lowest value on keeping a positive attitude. Qualitative findings revealed barriers and facilitator themes of coping, parenting, and decision making, including access, behavioral, cognitive, communication, emotional, environmental, relational, and spiritual barriers and facilitators. Mixed methods findings explained that mothers in both the prenatal and postnatal groups were engaged in decision making, but at different time points and in different ways. Conclusions: Overall, the findings show trends in NICU coping, parenting and decision-making for mothers who have received a prenatal vs. postnatal diagnosis. Future researchers should explore study variables in specific congenital anomaly populations and racial/ethnic minority populations where congenital anomalies are more prevalent

Exploring Rare Disease Patient Attitudes and Beliefs regarding Genetic Testing: Implications for Person-Centered Care

Most rare diseases are genetic in etiology and characterized by a ‘diagnostic odyssey’. Genomic advances have helped speed up the diagnosis for many rare disorders, opening new avenues for precision therapies. Little is known about patient attitudes, experiences, and beliefs about genetic testing for the rare disease congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (CHH). Methods: We conducted six focus groups with patients with CHH (n = 58). Transcripts were coded by independent investigators and validated by external reviewers. Results: Major themes relating to pre-test experiences were ‘attitudes & beliefs’ (most frequently cited theme), which revealed altruism as a strong motivator for pursuing research testing and ‘information and support,’ which revealed a striking lack of pre-testing decisional support/genetic counseling. Major post-test themes included ‘return of results,’ revealing frustration with the lack of return of results and limited emotional support, and ‘family communication,’ describing challenging intrafamilial communication. Themes describing ethical concerns (i.e., privacy, use of samples) were least frequently noted and related to pre- and post-test experiences. Conclusions: Patients with CHH are highly motivated by altruism when pursuing testing but have significant unmet needs for pre-test decisional support and post-test counseling. It is regarded that patient values, beliefs and experiences can inform more person-centered approaches to genetic testing for rare diseases

Medical Evaluation of Unanticipated Monogenic Disease Risks Identified throughNewborn Genomic Screening: Findings from the BabySeq Project

Abstract Genomic sequencing of healthy newborns to screen for medically important genetic information has long been anticipated but data around downstream medical consequences are lacking. Among 159 infants randomized to the sequencing arm in the BabySeq Project, an unanticipated monogenic disease risk (uMDR) was discovered in 18 (11.3%). We assessed uMDR actionability by visualizing scores from a modified ClinGen Actionability SemiQuantitative Metric and tracked medical outcomes in these infants for 3-5 years. All uMDRs scored as highly actionable (mean 9, range: 7-11 on a 0-12 scale) and had readily available clinical interventions. In 4 cases, uMDRs revealed unsuspected genetic etiologies for existing phenotypes, and in the remaining 14 cases provided risk stratification for future surveillance. In 8 cases, uMDRs prompted screening for multiple at-risk family members. These results suggest that actionable uMDRs are more common than previously thought and support ongoing efforts to evaluate population-based newborn genomic screening.</jats:p

Table1_ACCESS: an empirically-based framework developed by the International Nursing CASCADE Consortium to address genomic disparities through the nursing workforce.docx

Introduction: Efforts are needed across disciplines to close disparities in genomic healthcare. Nurses are the most numerous trained healthcare professionals worldwide and can play a key role in addressing disparities across the continuum of care. ACCESS is an empirically-based theoretical framework to guide clinical practice in order to ameliorate genomic disparities.Methods: The framework was developed by the International Nursing CASCADE Consortium based on evidence collected between 2005 and 2023 from individuals and families of various ethnic backgrounds, with diverse hereditary conditions, and in different healthcare systems, i.e., Israel, Korea, Switzerland, and several U.S. States. The components of the framework were validated against published scientific literature.Results: ACCESS stands for Advocating, Coping, Communication, cascadE Screening, and Surveillance. Each component is demonstrated in concrete examples of clinical practice within the scope of the nursing profession related to genomic healthcare. Key outcomes include advocacy, active coping, intrafamilial communication, cascade screening, and lifelong surveillance. Advocacy entails timely identification of at-risk individuals, facilitating referrals to specialized services, and informed decision-making for testing. Active coping enhances lifelong adaptation and management of disease risk. Effective intrafamilial communication of predisposition to hereditary disease supports cascade testing of unaffected at-risk relatives. Lifelong surveillance is essential for identifying recurrence, changes in health status, and disease trajectory for life-threatening and for life-altering conditions.Discussion: ACCESS provides a standardized, systematic, situational, and unifying guide to practice and is applicable for nursing and for other healthcare professions. When appropriately enacted it will contribute towards equitable access to genomic resources and services.</p