Also available in print.Thesis (B.Sc)--University of Hong Kong, 2007.A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Bachelor of Science (Speech and Hearing Sciences), The University of Hong Kong, June 30, 2007.published_or_final_versionSpeech and Hearing SciencesBachelorBachelor of Science in Speech and Hearing Science

Ana María Pascual

Helena Olivera

Juan A. Cruzado

Leticia Rojo

María Del Pilar Laserna

Pedro Pérez Segura

Rosario Martínez

Psicooncología

Objectives: a) Assess the psychosocial impact of predictive testing. b) Check the effect of variables: gender, cancer diagnosis, cancer treatment, first proband, the type of hereditary syndrome: breast/ovarian or colorectal cancer, result of genetic testing, and time since the communication of results. c) To study the psychometric properties and replicate the factor structure of the Spanish version of MICRA.Method: We studied 122 subjects who had genetic testing done at an interval of 1 month to 5 years. They were administrated the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) Questionnaire. Sample data: 95 women and 27 men; mean age: 50.48 years; with high education; 93 (72.2%) were diagnosed with cancer; 45 (36.9%) were receiving cancer treatment; 89 (73%) consulted for breast/ovarian cancer risk and 33 (27%) for colorectal cancer risk; 50 (41%) were negative for the mutation test, 37(30.3%) positive and 35 (28.7%) non-informative. The average time elapsed since the communication of results: 401 days.We calculated the internal consistency of MICRA, took out a multitrait scaling analysis and a confirmatory factor analysis.Results: The genetic test did not cause a negative psychological impact. The variables of sex, cancer diagnosis, cancer treatment, first proband, type of syndrome (breast/ovarian-colorectal) or time elapsed do not influence the impact of genetic testing. The result type (positive, negative and non-informative) was significant in the ANOVA, Tukey test showed differences in distress subscale of the positive vs. negative (p=0.00), with Cohen’s d=1,16), and positive vs. non-informative (p=0.00), Cohen’s d = 0.84, on the subscale positive experiences the differences are between positive vs. negative (p=0.01), Cohen’s d=0.68, and positive vs. non-informative (p=0.02), Cohen’s d=0.67, in the total are the differences between the positive vs. negative (p=0.000), Cohen’s d=0.96, and between positive vs. non-informative (p=0.00), Cohen’s d = 1.00. The MICRA showed satisfactory internal consistency. The convergent and discriminant validity were adequate for the distress and positive experience subscales, but not for the uncertainty subscale. Factor analysis confirms the distress and positive experiences subscales but not uncertainty subscale.Conclusions: Genetic testing did not cause a negative psychological impact. Mutation carriers showed a greater negative impact than participants with negative and uninformative. The MICRA showed good psychometric properties, but the Spanish version needs significant improvements.Objetivos: a) valorar el impacto psicosocial de la realización del test genético. b) Comprobar el efecto de las variables: sexo, diagnóstico oncológico, estar recibiendo tratamiento, ser el primer probando, el tipo de síndrome hereditario: cáncer de mama/ovario (SHCMO) o cáncer de colon (SHCC), resultado del test genético; y tiempo desde la comunicación de resultados. c) Estudiar las propiedades psicométricas y replicar la estructura factorial de la versión castellana del MICRA.Método: se evaluó a 122 sujetos que habían realizado test genético en un intervalo de 1 mes a 5 años, mediante el cuestionario de evaluación multidimensional del impacto de riesgo de cáncer (MICRA). Datos de la muestra: 95 mujeres y 27 hombres; media de edad: 50,48 años; con nivel educativo alto; 93 (72,2%) fueron diagnosticados de cáncer; 45 (36,9%) recibían tratamiento oncológico; 89 (73%) consultaban por SHCMO y 33 (27%) por SHCC; 50 (41%) eran negativos para la mutación, 37 (30,3%) positivos y 35 (28,7%) no informativos. La media del tiempo que ha transcurrido desde la comunicación de los resultados: 401 días. Se calculó la consistencia interna del MICRA, se llevó a cabo un análisis de la validez convergente y discriminante de los ítems de la escala y un análisis factorial confirmatorio. Resultados. El test genético no producía un impacto psicológico adverso. Las variables sexo, diagnóstico de cáncer, tratamientos antitumorales, ser el primer probando, el tipo de síndrome (SHCMO o SHCC) o el tiempo desde los resultados, no influenciaban el impacto del test genético. El tipo de resultado (positivo, negativo y no informativo) fue significativo en la prueba de ANOVA, el test de Tukey mostró diferencias en la subescala de malestar entre los positivos vs. negativos (p=0,00), con una d de Cohen=1,16), y los positivos vs. No-informativos (p=0,00), d de Cohen=0,84; en la subescala experiencias positivas las diferencias se deban entre los positivos y los negativos (p=0,01), d de Cohen= 0,68, y los positivos vs. no informativos (p=0,02), d de Cohen=0,67; en el total se encuentran la diferencias significativas entre los positivos vs. negativos (p=0,000), d de Cohen= 0,96, y entre los positivos vs. no informativos (p=0,00), d de Cohen= 1,00.El MICRA mostró una consistencia interna satisfactoria. El análisis de la validez convergente y discriminante del test fue adecuada para las subescalas de malestar y experiencias positivas, pero no para la de incertidumbre. El análisis factorial permite confirmar las subescalas de malestar y experiencias positivas pero no la de incertidumbre.Conclusiones. La realización del test genético no produce efectos adversos. Las personas positivas para la mutación muestran mayor impacto negativo que los negativos y no informativos, que no diferencian entre sí. El MICRA posee adecuadas propiedades psicométricas, pero la versión española necesita mejorías notables

Cruzado, Juan A.

Pérez Segura, Pedro

Olivera, Helena

Rojo, Leticia

Martínez, Rosario

Laserna, María Del Pilar

Pascual, Ana María

Portal de Revistas Científicas Complutenses

Impacto psicológico del consejo genético valorado por el cuestionario de evaluación multidimensional del impacto de riesgo de cáncer (micra). estudio de las propiedades psicométricas del micra

Crossref

Objectives: a) Assess the psychosocial impact of predictive testing. b) Check the effect of variables: gender, cancer diagnosis, cancer treatment, first proband, the type of hereditary syndrome: breast/ovarian or colorectal cancer, result of genetic testing, and time since the communication of results. c) To study the psychometric properties and replicate the factor structure of the Spanish version of MICRA.Method: We studied 122 subjects who had genetic testing done at an interval of 1 month to 5 years. They were administrated the Multidimensional Impact of Cancer Risk Assessment (MICRA) Questionnaire. Sample data: 95 women and 27 men; mean age: 50.48 years; with high education; 93 (72.2%) were diagnosed with cancer; 45 (36.9%) were receiving cancer treatment; 89 (73%) consulted for breast/ovarian cancer risk and 33 (27%) for colorectal cancer risk; 50 (41%) were negative for the mutation test, 37(30.3%) positive and 35 (28.7%) non-informative. The average time elapsed since the communication of results: 401 days.We calculated the internal consistency of MICRA, took out a multitrait scaling analysis and a confirmatory factor analysis.Results: The genetic test did not cause a negative psychological impact. The variables of sex, cancer diagnosis, cancer treatment, first proband, type of syndrome (breast/ovarian-colorectal) or time elapsed do not influence the impact of genetic testing. The result type (positive, negative and non-informative) was significant in the ANOVA, Tukey test showed differences in distress subscale of the positive vs. negative (p=0.00), with Cohen’s d=1,16), and positive vs. non-informative (p=0.00), Cohen’s d = 0.84, on the subscale positive experiences the differences are between positive vs. negative (p=0.01), Cohen’s d=0.68, and positive vs. non-informative (p=0.02), Cohen’s d=0.67, in the total are the differences between the positive vs. negative (p=0.000), Cohen’s d=0.96, and between positive vs. non-informative (p=0.00), Cohen’s d = 1.00. The MICRA showed satisfactory internal consistency. The convergent and discriminant validity were adequate for the distress and positive experience subscales, but not for the uncertainty subscale. Factor analysis confirms the distress and positive experiences subscales but not uncertainty subscale.Conclusions: Genetic testing did not cause a negative psychological impact. Mutation carriers showed a greater negative impact than participants with negative and uninformative. The MICRA showed good psychometric properties, but the Spanish version needs significant improvements

Directory of Open Access Journals

Psychological impact of genetic testing evaluated by the multidimensional impact of cancer risk assessment (MICRA) questionnaire. A study of psychometric properties of MICRA

Wong, Ching-yin, Juliana

HKU Scholars Hub