scholarly journals Perceptions of and Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening Among Physicians in Puerto Rico: A Qualitative Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 973-991
Author(s):  
Mary S. Rodríguez-Rabassa ◽  
Vani N. Simmons ◽  
Agueda Vega ◽  
Daniela Moreno ◽  
Jessica Irizarry-Ramos ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e000448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mamta Ruparel ◽  
Samantha Quaife ◽  
David Baldwin ◽  
Jo Waller ◽  
Samuel Janes

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.


2017 ◽  
pp. cmw146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Carter-Harris ◽  
Susan Brandzel ◽  
Karen J Wernli ◽  
Joshua A Roth ◽  
Diana S M Buist

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 1977-1982 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeti M. Kanodra ◽  
Charlene Pope ◽  
Chanita H. Halbert ◽  
Gerard A. Silvestri ◽  
LaShanta J. Rice ◽  
...  

Thorax ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 418-425 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deesha Patel ◽  
Ajiri Akporobaro ◽  
Nyasha Chinyanganya ◽  
Allan Hackshaw ◽  
Clive Seale ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 546-553 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne C Melzer ◽  
Sara E. Golden ◽  
Sarah S. Ono ◽  
Santanu Datta ◽  
Kristina Crothers ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (7) ◽  
pp. 1035-1042 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renda Soylemez Wiener ◽  
Elisa Koppelman ◽  
Rendelle Bolton ◽  
Karen E. Lasser ◽  
Belinda Borrelli ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ambreen Sayani ◽  
Mandana Vahabi ◽  
Mary Ann O’Brien ◽  
Geoffrey Liu ◽  
Stephen W. Hwang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Individuals living with low income are less likely to participate in lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography. Family physicians (FPs) are typically responsible for referring eligible patients to LCS; therefore, we sought to understand their perspectives on access to lung cancer screening for individuals living with low income in order to improve equity in access to LCS. Methods: A theory-informed qualitative study was conducted using data collected from 11 semi-structured interviews with FPs recruited from three primary care sites in downtown Toronto. Data was coded using the Systems Model of Clinical Preventative Care as a framework and interpretation was guided by the synergies of oppression analytical lens. Results: Four overarching themes describe FP perspectives on access to LCS for individuals living with low income: the degree of social disadvantage that influences lung cancer risk and opportunities to access care; the clinical encounter, where there is often a mismatch between the complex health needs of low income individuals and structure of health care appointments; the need for equity-oriented health care, illustrated by the neglect of structural origins of health risk and the benefits of a trauma-informed approach; and finally, the multiprong strategies that will be needed in order to improve equity in health outcomes. Conclusion: An equity-oriented and interdisciplinary team based approach to care will be needed in order to improve access to LCS, and attention must be given to the upstream determinants of lung cancer in order to reduce lung cancer risk.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document