Literature DB >> 32798520

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

Amir Alishahi Tabriz1, Christine Neslund-Dudas2, Kea Turner3, M Patricia Rivera4, Daniel S Reuland4, Jennifer Elston Lafata5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services stipulate shared decision-making (SDM) counseling as a prerequisite to lung cancer screening (LCS) reimbursement, despite well-known challenges implementing SDM in practice. RESEARCH QUESTION: How have health-care organizations implemented SDM for LCS? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: For this qualitative study, we used data from in-depth, semistructured interviews with key informants directly involved in implementing SDM for LCS, managing SDM for LCS, or both. We identified respondents using a snowball sampling technique and used template analysis to identify and analyze responses thematically.
RESULTS: We interviewed 30 informants representing 23 health-care organizations located in 12 states and 4 Census regions. Respondents described two types of SDM for LCS programs: centralized models (n = 7), in which front-end practitioners (eg, primary care providers) referred patients to an LCS clinic where trained staff (eg, advanced practice nurses) delivered SDM at the time of screening, or decentralized models (n = 10), in which front-end practitioners delivered SDM before referring patients for screening. Some organizations used both models simultaneously (n = 6). Respondents discussed tradeoffs between SDM quality and access. They perceived centralized models as enhancing SDM quality, but limiting patient access to care, and vice versa. Respondents reported ongoing challenges with limited resources and budgetary constraints, ambiguity regarding what constitutes SDM, and an absence of benchmarks for evaluating SDM for LCS quality.
INTERPRETATION: Those responsible for developing and managing SDM for LCS programs voiced concerns regarding both patient access and SDM quality, regardless of organizational context, or the SDM for LCS model implemented. The challenge facing these organizations, and those wanting to help patients and clinicians balance the tradeoffs inherent with LCS, is how to move beyond a check-box documentation requirement to a process that enables LCS to be offered to all high-risk patients, but used only by those who are informed and for whom screening represents a value-concordant service.
Copyright © 2020 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  implementation; informed decision-making; lung cancer; lung cancer screening; shared decision-making

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32798520      PMCID: PMC7893305          DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.07.078

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chest        ISSN: 0012-3692            Impact factor:   9.410


  41 in total

1.  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

2.  Lung cancer screening practices of primary care physicians: results from a national survey.

Authors:  Carrie N Klabunde; Pamela M Marcus; Paul K J Han; Thomas B Richards; Sally W Vernon; Gigi Yuan; Gerard A Silvestri
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2012 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.166

Review 3.  Where is the evidence? A systematic review of shared decision making and patient outcomes.

Authors:  L Aubree Shay; Jennifer Elston Lafata
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 4.  Lung cancer screening overdiagnosis: reports of overdiagnosis in screening for lung cancer are grossly exaggerated.

Authors:  Eduardo J Mortani Barbosa
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2015-03-13       Impact factor: 3.173

Review 5.  Knowledge is not power for patients: a systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient-reported barriers and facilitators to shared decision making.

Authors:  Natalie Joseph-Williams; Glyn Elwyn; Adrian Edwards
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2013-11-09

6.  The Effect of Primary Care Physician Knowledge of Lung Cancer Screening Guidelines on Perceptions and Utilization of Low-Dose Computed Tomography.

Authors:  Dan J Raz; Geena X Wu; Martin Consunji; Rebecca A Nelson; Heeyoung Kim; Can-Lan Sun; Virginia Sun; Jae Y Kim
Journal:  Clin Lung Cancer       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 4.785

7.  Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: a systematic review of health professionals' perceptions.

Authors:  Karine Gravel; France Légaré; Ian D Graham
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2006-08-09       Impact factor: 7.327

8.  New recommendation and coverage of low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening: uptake has increased but is still low.

Authors:  Jiang Li; Sukyung Chung; Esther K Wei; Harold S Luft
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-07-05       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Telephone-Based Shared Decision-making for Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care.

Authors:  Heather Bittner Fagan; Nicole A Fournakis; Claudine Jurkovitz; Anett M Petrich; Zugui Zhang; Nora Katurakes; Ronald E Myers
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 10.  "Many miles to go …": a systematic review of the implementation of patient decision support interventions into routine clinical practice.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn; Isabelle Scholl; Caroline Tietbohl; Mala Mann; Adrian G K Edwards; Catharine Clay; France Légaré; Trudy van der Weijden; Carmen L Lewis; Richard M Wexler; Dominick L Frosch
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2013-11-29       Impact factor: 2.796

View more
  5 in total

1.  Prospective Multisite Cohort Study to Evaluate Shared Decision-Making Utilization Among Individuals Screened for Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Tina D Tailor; M Patricia Rivera; Danielle D Durham; Pasangi Perera; Lindsay Lane; Louise M Henderson
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2022-04-16       Impact factor: 6.240

2.  Lost to follow up?: A qualitative study of why some patients do not pursue lung cancer screening.

Authors:  Ilana B Richman; Taara V Prasad; Cary P Gross
Journal:  Prev Med Rep       Date:  2022-07-21

3.  Factors Associated With Declining Lung Cancer Screening After Discussion With a Physician in a Cohort of US Veterans.

Authors:  Eduardo R Núñez; Tanner J Caverly; Sanqian Zhang; Mark E Glickman; Shirley X Qian; Jacqueline H Boudreau; Donald R Miller; Christopher G Slatore; Renda Soylemez Wiener
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-08-01

4.  "It's Really Like Any Other Study": Rural Radiology Facilities Performing Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Christopher G Slatore; Sara E Golden; Tara Thomas; Sarah Bumatay; Jackilen Shannon; Melinda Davis
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2021-12

5.  De-implementing low-value care in cancer care delivery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Amir Alishahi Tabriz; Kea Turner; Alecia Clary; Young-Rock Hong; Oliver T Nguyen; Grace Wei; Rebecca B Carlson; Sarah A Birken
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2022-03-12       Impact factor: 7.327

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.