P2.11-28 A Focus Group and Interview Study to Explore the Information-Needs of Lung Cancer Screening Participants

IntroductionLung cancer screening (LCS) by low-dose CT has been shown to improve mortality, but individuals must consider the potential benefits and harms before making an informed decision about taking part. Shared decision-making is required for LCS in USA, though screening-eligible individuals’ specific views of these harms, and their preferences for accessing this information, are not well described.MethodsIn this qualitative study, we aimed to explore knowledge and perceptions around lung cancer and LCS with a focus on harms. We carried out seven focus groups with screening-eligible individuals, which were divided into current versus former smokers and lower versus higher educational backgrounds; and 16 interviews with health professionals including general practitioners, respiratory physicians, lung cancer nurse specialists and public health consultants. Interviews and focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data were coded inductively and analysed using the framework method.ResultsFatalistic views about lung cancer as an incurable disease dominated, particularly among current smokers, and participants were often unaware of curative treatment options. Despite this, beliefs that screening is sensible and worthwhile were expressed. Generally participants felt they had the ‘right’ to an informed decision, though some cautioned against information overload. The potential harms of LCS were poorly understood, particularly overdiagnosis and radiation exposure, but participants were unlikely to be deterred by them. Strong concerns about false-negative results were expressed, while false-positive results and indeterminate nodules were also reported as concerning.ConclusionsThese findings demonstrate the need for LCS information materials to highlight information on the benefits of early detection and options for curative treatment, while accurately presenting the possible harms. Information needs are likely to vary between individuals and we recommend simple information materials to be made available to all individuals considering participating in LCS, with signposting to more detailed information for those who require it.

Download Full-text

Correction: Defining the information needs of lung cancer screening participants: a qualitative study

BMJ Open Respiratory Research ◽

10.1136/bmjresp-2019-000448corr1 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (1) ◽

pp. e000448corr1

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Cancer Screening ◽

Qualitative Study ◽

Information Needs ◽

Lung Cancer Screening

Download Full-text

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

Annals of the American Thoracic Society ◽

10.1513/annalsats.201604-289oc ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 13 (11) ◽

pp. 1992-2001 ◽

Cited By ~ 37

Author(s):

Kristina Crothers ◽

Erin K. Kross ◽

Lisa M. Reisch ◽

Shahida Shahrir ◽

Christopher Slatore ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Cancer Screening ◽

Focus Group ◽

Decision Aids ◽

Lung Cancer Screening ◽

Focus Group Study

Download Full-text

Primary care providers’ views on a future lung cancer screening program

Family Practice ◽

10.1093/fampra/cmy099 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 36 (4) ◽

pp. 501-505 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Mary Ann O’Brien ◽

Diego Llovet ◽

Frank Sullivan ◽

Lawrence Paszat

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Cancer Screening ◽

Information Needs ◽

Screening Program ◽

Lung Cancer Screening ◽

Primary Care Providers ◽

Administrative Staff ◽

Care Providers ◽

Cancer Screening Program ◽

Lung Cancer Screening Program

Abstract Background The National Lung Screening Trial demonstrated that screening with low-dose computed tomography significantly reduces mortality from lung cancer in high-risk individuals. Objective To describe the role preferences and information needs of primary care providers (PCPs) in a future organized lung cancer screening program. Methods We purposively sampled PCPs from diverse health regions of Ontario and from different practice models including family health teams and community health centres. We also recruited family physicians with a leadership role in cancer screening. We used focus groups and a nominal group process to identify informational priorities. Two analysts systematically applied a coding scheme to interview transcripts. Results Four groups were held with 34 providers and administrative staff [28 (82%) female, 21 (62%) physicians, 7 (20%) other health professionals and 6 (18%) administrative staff]. PCPs and staff were generally positive about a potential lung cancer screening program but had variable views on their involvement. Informational needs included evidence of potential benefits and harms of screening. Most providers preferred that a new program be modelled on positive features of an existing breast cancer screening program. Lung cancer screening was viewed as a new opportunity to counsel patients about smoking cessation. Conclusions The development of a future lung cancer screening program should consider the wide variability in the roles that PCPs preferred. An explicit link to existing smoking cessation programs was seen as essential. As providers had significant information needs, learning materials and opportunities should be developed with them.

Download Full-text

Barriers, Facilitators, and Suggested Interventions for Lung Cancer Screening Among a Rural Screening-Eligible Population

Journal of Primary Care & Community Health ◽

10.1177/2150132720930544 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 11 ◽

pp. 215013272093054 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Jenna E. Schiffelbein ◽

Kathleen L. Carluzzo ◽

Rian M. Hasson ◽

Jennifer A. Alford-Teaster ◽

Inger Imset ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Mixed Methods ◽

Cancer Screening ◽

Focus Group ◽

Rural Areas ◽

Community Outreach ◽

Lung Cancer Screening ◽

Eligible Population ◽

Incidence And Mortality ◽

Embedded Design

Introduction: Rural areas are disproportionally affected by lung cancer late-stage incidence and mortality. Lung cancer screening (LCS) is recommended to find lung cancer early and reduce mortality, yet uptake is low. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the barriers to, facilitators of, and suggested interventions for increasing LCS among a rural screening-eligible population using a mixed methods concurrent embedded design study. Methods: Qualitative and quantitative data were collected from rural-residing adults who met the eligibility criteria for LCS but who were not up-to-date with LCS recommendations. Study participants (n = 23) took part in 1 of 5 focus groups and completed a survey. Focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed, and coded through a mixed deductive and inductive approach. Survey data were used to enhance and clarify focus group results; these data were integrated in the design and during analysis, in accordance with the mixed methods concurrent embedded design approach. Results: Several key barriers to LCS were identified, including an overall lack of knowledge about LCS, not receiving information or recommendation from a health care provider, and lack of transportation. Key facilitators were receiving a provider recommendation and high motivation to know the screening results. Participants suggested that LCS uptake could be increased by addressing provider understanding and recommendation of LCS and conducting community outreach to promote LCS awareness and access. Conclusion: The results suggest that the rural screening-eligible population is generally receptive to LCS. Patient-level factors important to getting this population screened include knowledge, transportation, motivation to know their screening results, and receiving information or recommendation from a provider. Addressing these factors may be important to increase rural LCS uptake.

Download Full-text