Patient and Clinician Recommendations to Improve Communication and Understanding of Lung Cancer Screening Results

被引:7
作者
Crothers, Kristina [1 ,2 ]
Shahrir, Shahida [2 ,4 ]
Kross, Erin K. [2 ,5 ]
Kava, Christine M. [4 ]
Cole, Allison [3 ]
Wenger, David [7 ]
Triplette, Matthew [2 ,6 ]
机构
[1] VA Puget Sound Healthcare Syst, Div Pulm, Crit Care & Sleep Med, Seattle, WA 98108 USA
[2] Dept Med, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[3] Univ Washington, Dept Family Med, Seattle, WA USA
[4] Univ Washington, Dept Hlth Syst & Populat Hlth, Sch Publ Hlth, Seattle, WA USA
[5] UW Med, Cambia Palliat Care Ctr Excellence, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[6] Fred Hutchinson Canc Ctr, Clin Res Div, Seattle, WA USA
[7] Evergreen Healthcare, Div Pulm & Crit Care, Kirkland, WA USA
关键词
communication; low-dose CT scan; lung cancer screening; shared decision-making; ADHERENCE; QUESTIONS; VETERANS;
D O I
10.1016/j.chest.2022.09.038
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Patient understanding of chest low-dose CT (LDCT) scan results for lung cancer screening (LCS) may impact outcomes.RESEARCH QUESTION: What are patient-and clinician-identified gaps in understanding and communication of LCS results and how might communication be improved through a patient-oriented tool?STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a mixed-methods study of participants recruited from a multisite LCS program to understand knowledge gaps after receiving LCS results and to guide development of a commonly asked questions (CAQ) after LCS information sheet. Initial patient surveys assessed understanding and reactions to LCS results (n = 190). We then conducted patient interviews and focus group discussions (n = 31) to understand experiences receiving LDCT scan results and reactions to results letters and the proposed CAQ; we also interviewed clinicians (n = 6) for feedback on these resources. We summarized survey re-sponses and used thematic analysis to identify major themes in focus groups and interviews.RESULTS: Of 190 survey respondents (43% response rate), although 88% agreed that they "understood" their LCS results, only 55% reported understanding what a lung nodule is. Approximately two-thirds thought it was "very important" to receive more information regarding lung nodules and incidental lung and heart disease. In interviews and focus groups, although patients believed that brief results letters for normal LDCT scan results generally were acceptable, most found letters explaining abnormal LDCT scan and incidental findings to be concerning and not a substitute for discussion with their clinician. Nearly all patients expressed that the CAQ sheet provided helpful information on nodules, results reporting and incidental findings, and helped them form questions to ask their clinicians.INTERPRETATION: We identified patient-reported information needs regarding LCS results and developed a CAQ information sheet that was refined with patient and clinician input. The CAQ may represent a simple and feasible way to improve LCS results reporting and to augment clinician-patient discussions. CHEST 2023; 163(3):707-718
引用
收藏
页码:707 / 718
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Factors affecting patient adherence to lung cancer screening: A multisite analysis
    Stowell, Justin T.
    Narayan, Anand K.
    Wang, Gary X.
    Fintelmann, Florian J.
    Flores, Efren J.
    Sharma, Amita
    Petranovic, Milena
    Shepard, Jo-Anne O.
    Little, Brent P.
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2021, 28 (03) : 357 - 364
  • [32] Use of Diagnostic CT and Patient Retention in a Lung Cancer Screening Program
    Byrne, Suzanne C.
    Hammer, Mark M.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2022, 19 (01) : 47 - 52
  • [33] Cancer patient and clinician acceptability and feasibility of a supportive care screening and referral process
    Ristevski, Eli
    Regan, Melanie
    Jones, Rebecca
    Breen, Sibilah
    Batson, Angela
    McGrail, Matthew R.
    HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2015, 18 (03) : 406 - 418
  • [34] LuCaS DA: A Lung Cancer Screening Decision Aid to Improve Screening Decisions
    Studts, Jamie
    Brinker, Kory
    Tannenbaum, Stacey
    Byrne, Margaret
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY, 2017, 12 (01) : S577 - S577
  • [35] Patient Perspective on Lung Cancer Screening and Health Disparities
    Borondy-Kitts, A.
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC ONCOLOGY, 2021, 16 (03) : S76 - S77
  • [36] Patient Perspectives on Longitudinal Adherence to Lung Cancer Screening
    Holman, Anna
    Kross, Erin
    Crothers, Kristina
    Cole, Allison
    Wernli, Karen
    Triplette, Matthew
    CHEST, 2022, 162 (01) : 230 - 241
  • [37] The Patient Perspective on Lung Cancer Screening and Health Disparities
    Kitts, Andrea K. Borondy
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGY, 2019, 16 (04) : 601 - 606
  • [38] Patient Perspectives on a Patient-Facing Tool for Lung Cancer Screening
    Tiase, Victoria L.
    Richards, Grace
    Taft, Teresa
    Stevens, Leticia
    Balbin, Christian
    Kaphingst, Kimberly A.
    Fagerlin, Angela
    Caverly, Tanner
    Kukhareva, Polina
    Flynn, Michael
    Butler, Jorie M.
    Kawamoto, Kensaku
    HEALTH EXPECTATIONS, 2024, 27 (04)
  • [39] Patient motivations for non-adherence to lung cancer screening in a military population
    Seastedt, Kenneth P.
    Luca, Michael J.
    Antevil, Jared L.
    Browning, Robert F.
    Mullenix, Philip S.
    Reoma, Junewai L.
    McKay, Sean A.
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2020, 12 (10) : 5916 - 5924
  • [40] Primary Care Provider and Patient Perspectives on Lung Cancer Screening A Qualitative Study
    Kanodra, Neeti M.
    Pope, Charlene
    Halbert, Chanita H.
    Silvestri, Gerard A.
    Rice, LaShanta J.
    Tanner, Nichole T.
    ANNALS OF THE AMERICAN THORACIC SOCIETY, 2016, 13 (11) : 1977 - 1982