Communication skills training program for medical staff in cancer genomic testing: A mixed-methods assessment of an educational initiative.

Abstract

9017 Background: Cancer genomic testing presents unique communication challenges for medical staff, particularly regarding low treatment access rates, the complex psychological needs of patients, and concerns about germline findings. While communication skills training (CST) has shown promise in oncology settings, it has not yet been specifically applied to genomic testing conversations. This Pfizer Global Medical Grants Initiative 2023 was designed to address this critical educational gap in the implementation of cancer genomic medicine. Methods: A mixed-methods evaluation was conducted of a structured CST program implemented across 10 institutions under Pfizer’s educational initiative framework. The program incorporated SHARE protocol-based training (Fujimori et al . JCO . 2014), role-playing sessions, and specialized modules addressing genomic testing-specific challenges. The quantitative assessment utilized pre- and post-intervention 4-point categorical assessments. The qualitative evaluation employed semi-structured interviews (median duration 12 minutes, range 7-21) analyzed using a modified grounded theory approach until theoretical saturation. Results: Among 251 participants (22% physicians, 37% nurses, 25% other healthcare professionals, 12% administrative staff, 4% others; median experience 9 years, range 0-39), 95% initially reported a psychological burden when explaining genomic testing results. Post-intervention, 94% reported a reduced psychological burden ( p < 0.001, Chi-square), with 84% expressing satisfaction with the training program. An ordinal logistic regression analysis revealed a significantly greater improvement in nurses than in other professionals (OR 3.52, 95%CI 1.88-6.58, p < 0.001). A qualitative analysis of 19 interviews (58% medical staff, 42% patients/families) revealed four major conceptual categories through a constant comparative analysis: 1) multilayered information needs with psychological support requirements, 2) experiential uncertainty in communicating germline findings, 3) perceived competency gaps in genomic counseling, and 4) organizational support needs for sustained practice changes. A thematic analysis identified a strong demand for program continuation and expansion. Conclusions: This educational initiative revealed significant effectiveness in addressing critical communication challenges in cancer genomic medicine. The mixed-methods evaluation provides a robust framework for implementing specialized CST programs in genomic medicine practice. These results will contribute to the evolving landscape of cancer genomic medicine education and support the value of structured, evidence-based educational initiatives in advancing the delivery of precision oncology care.