Literature DB >> 29468601

Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Shared Decision-making in Early Adopting Lung Cancer Screening Programs: a Qualitative Study.

Renda Soylemez Wiener1,2, Elisa Koppelman3,4, Rendelle Bolton3,5, Karen E Lasser4,6, Belinda Borrelli7, David H Au8,9, Christopher G Slatore10,11, Jack A Clark3,4, Hasmeena Kathuria12.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend, and Medicare requires, shared decision-making between patients and clinicians before referring individuals at high risk of lung cancer for chest CT screening. However, little is known about the extent to which shared decision-making about lung cancer screening is achieved in real-world settings.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize patient and clinician impressions of early experiences with communication and decision-making about lung cancer screening and perceived barriers to achieving shared decision-making.
DESIGN: Qualitative study entailing semi-structured interviews and focus groups. PARTICIPANTS: We enrolled 36 clinicians who refer patients for lung cancer screening and 49 patients who had undergone lung cancer screening in the prior year. Participants were recruited from lung cancer screening programs at four hospitals (three Veterans Health Administration, one urban safety net). APPROACH: Using content analysis, we analyzed transcripts to characterize communication and decision-making about lung cancer screening. Our analysis focused on the recommended components of shared decision-making (information sharing, deliberation, and decision aid use) and barriers to achieving shared decision-making. KEY
RESULTS: Clinicians varied in the information shared with patients, and did not consistently incorporate decision aids. Clinicians believed they explained the rationale and gave some (often purposely limited) information about the trade-offs of lung cancer screening. By contrast, some patients reported receiving little information about screening or its trade-offs and did not realize the CT was intended as a screening test for lung cancer. Clinicians and patients alike did not perceive that significant deliberation typically occurred. Clinicians perceived insufficient time, competing priorities, difficulty accessing decision aids, limited patient comprehension, and anticipated patient emotions as barriers to realizing shared decision-making.
CONCLUSIONS: Due to multiple perceived barriers, patient-clinician conversations about lung cancer screening may fall short of guideline-recommended shared decision-making supported by a decision aid. Consequently, patients may be left uncertain about lung cancer screening's rationale, trade-offs, and process.

Entities:  

Keywords:  lung cancer screening; patient-clinician communication; shared decision-making

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29468601      PMCID: PMC6025674          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-018-4350-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  38 in total

Review 1.  Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

Authors:  Dawn Stacey; France Légaré; Krystina Lewis; Michael J Barry; Carol L Bennett; Karen B Eden; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Anne Lyddiatt; Richard Thomson; Lyndal Trevena
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-04-12

2.  Lung cancer screening, version 1.2015: featured updates to the NCCN guidelines.

Authors:  Douglas E Wood; Ella Kazerooni; Scott L Baum; Mark T Dransfield; George A Eapen; David S Ettinger; Lifang Hou; David M Jackman; Donald Klippenstein; Rohit Kumar; Rudy P Lackner; Lorriana E Leard; Ann N C Leung; Samir S Makani; Pierre P Massion; Bryan F Meyers; Gregory A Otterson; Kimberly Peairs; Sudhakar Pipavath; Christie Pratt-Pozo; Chakravarthy Reddy; Mary E Reid; Arnold J Rotter; Peter B Sachs; Matthew B Schabath; Lecia V Sequist; Betty C Tong; William D Travis; Stephen C Yang; Kristina M Gregory; Miranda Hughes
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 11.908

3.  Implementation of Lung Cancer Screening in the Veterans Health Administration.

Authors:  Linda S Kinsinger; Charles Anderson; Jane Kim; Martha Larson; Stephanie H Chan; Heather A King; Kathryn L Rice; Christopher G Slatore; Nichole T Tanner; Kathleen Pittman; Robert J Monte; Rebecca B McNeil; Janet M Grubber; Michael J Kelley; Dawn Provenzale; Santanu K Datta; Nina S Sperber; Lottie K Barnes; David H Abbott; Kellie J Sims; Richard L Whitley; R Ryanne Wu; George L Jackson
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 21.873

4.  Longitudinal Assessment of Distress among Veterans with Incidental Pulmonary Nodules.

Authors:  Christopher G Slatore; Renda Soylemez Wiener; Sara E Golden; David H Au; Linda Ganzini
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2016-11

5.  Effects of Implementation of Lung Cancer Screening at One Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

Authors:  Ikenna C Okereke; Maria F Bates; Matthew D Jankowich; Sharon I Rounds; Brian A Kimble; Janelle V Baptiste; Thomas T Ng; Linda L Nici
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2016-08-25       Impact factor: 9.410

6.  Patients' Attitudes Regarding Lung Cancer Screening and Decision Aids. A Survey and Focus Group Study.

Authors:  Kristina Crothers; Erin K Kross; Lisa M Reisch; Shahida Shahrir; Christopher Slatore; Steven B Zeliadt; Matthew Triplette; Rafael Meza; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2016-11

7.  Validation of screening questions for limited health literacy in a large VA outpatient population.

Authors:  Lisa D Chew; Joan M Griffin; Melissa R Partin; Siamak Noorbaloochi; Joseph P Grill; Annamay Snyder; Katharine A Bradley; Sean M Nugent; Alisha D Baines; Michelle Vanryn
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2008-03-12       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Attitudes towards lung cancer screening in socioeconomically deprived and heavy smoking communities: informing screening communication.

Authors:  Samantha L Quaife; Laura A V Marlow; Andy McEwen; Samuel M Janes; Jane Wardle
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2016-07-11       Impact factor: 3.377

9.  Short-term health-related quality of life consequences in a lung cancer CT screening trial (NELSON).

Authors:  K A M van den Bergh; M L Essink-Bot; G J J M Borsboom; E Th Scholten; M Prokop; H J de Koning; R J van Klaveren
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2009-11-24       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 10.  The Role of the Advanced Practitioner in a Comprehensive Lung Cancer Screening and Pulmonary Nodule Program.

Authors:  Amanda E Reid; Lynn Tanoue; Frank Detterbeck; Gaetane Celine Michaud; Ruth McCorkle
Journal:  J Adv Pract Oncol       Date:  2014 Nov-Dec
View more
  26 in total

1.  Examining Lung Cancer Screening Behaviors in the Primary Care Setting: A Mixed Methods Approach.

Authors:  Alvie Ahsan; Eva Zimmerman; Elisa Marie Rodriguez; Christy Widman; Deborah Oates Erwin; Frances Georgette Saad-Harfouche; Martin Christopher Mahoney
Journal:  J Cancer Treat Res       Date:  2019-03-11

2.  Impact of a Lung Cancer Screening Information Film on Informed Decision-making: A Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Mamta Ruparel; Samantha L Quaife; Bhagabati Ghimire; Jennifer L Dickson; Angshu Bhowmik; Neal Navani; David R Baldwin; Stephen Duffy; Jo Waller; Sam M Janes
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2019-06

3.  Lung Cancer Screening Benefits and Harms Stratified by Patient Risk: Information to Improve Patient Decision Aids.

Authors:  Christina Bellinger; Paul Pinsky; Kristie Foley; Douglas Case; Ajay Dharod; David Miller
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2019-04

4.  The Conundrum and Challenge of Lung Cancer Screening Shared Decision-making Implementation.

Authors:  Marilyn M Schapira
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  What Exactly Is Shared Decision-Making? A Qualitative Study of Shared Decision-Making in Lung Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Anne C Melzer; Sara E Golden; Sarah S Ono; Santanu Datta; Kristina Crothers; Christopher G Slatore
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Patient vs Clinician Perspectives on Communication About Results of Lung Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Renda Soylemez Wiener; Jack A Clark; Elisa Koppelman; Rendelle Bolton; Gemmae M Fix; Christopher G Slatore; Hasmeena Kathuria
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2020-05-07       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 7.  Low-Dose CT Screening for Lung Cancer: Evidence from 2 Decades of Study.

Authors:  David S Gierada; William C Black; Caroline Chiles; Paul F Pinsky; David F Yankelevitz
Journal:  Radiol Imaging Cancer       Date:  2020-03-27

8.  Assessment of Lung Cancer Screening Program Websites.

Authors:  Stephen D Clark; Daniel S Reuland; Chineme Enyioha; Daniel E Jonas
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 21.873

9.  Attitudes of Clinicians about Screening Head and Neck Cancer Survivors for Lung Cancer Using Low-Dose Computed Tomography.

Authors:  Kimberly Dukes; Aaron T Seaman; Richard M Hoffman; Alan J Christensen; Nicholas Kendell; Andrew L Sussman; Miriam Vélez-Bermúdez; Robert J Volk; Nitin A Pagedar
Journal:  Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 1.547

10.  How Health-Care Organizations Implement Shared Decision-making When It Is Required for Reimbursement: The Case of Lung Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Amir Alishahi Tabriz; Christine Neslund-Dudas; Kea Turner; M Patricia Rivera; Daniel S Reuland; Jennifer Elston Lafata
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2020-08-13       Impact factor: 9.410

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.