Pre-counseling education materials for XXXX testing: does tailoring make a difference?

@entity1 @entity5344 @entity5345 @entity5 @entity2674 @entity6069 @entity148
Although tailored print materials (TPMs) have been assessed for a variety of behavioral targets, their effectiveness as decision aids for genetic testing had not been evaluated at the time this study began. We compared TPMs and non-tailored print material (NPMs) that included similar content about genetic testing for @entity5344 susceptibility. TPMs were prepared especially for an individual based on information from and about her. We mailed baseline surveys to 461 @entity1 referred by physicians or identified through a @entity5 registry. All had personal and family histories of @entity5344 and, on the basis of these histories, an estimated > or =10% probability of carrying a mutation in the @entity5344 genes @entity5345 or @entity2674 . The 325 (70%) who responded were randomly assigned to receive TPM or NPM. Followup surveys, mailed 2 weeks following receipt of print materials, were returned by 262 @entity1 (81% of baseline responders). @entity1 were predominately white (94%) and well-educated (50% college graduates). The mean age was 49 years. At follow-up, TPM recipients exhibited significantly greater improvement in percent of correct responses for the 13-item true/false measure of knowledge (24% increase for TPM vs. 16% for NPM; p < 0.0001) and significantly less over-estimation of risk of being a mutation carrier (40% TPM group overestimated vs. 70% NPM; p < 0.0001). @entity148 did not differ significantly between groups. Reactions to materials differed on two items: "seemed to be prepared just for me" (76% TPM vs. 52% NPM; p < 0.001) and "told me what I wanted to know about @entity6069 testing" (98% TPM vs. 91% NPM; p < 0.05). TPMs showed an advantage in increasing knowledge and enhancing accuracy of perceived risk. Both are critical components of informed decision making.
