Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27815154 below:

Impact of a Lung Cancer Screening Counseling and Shared Decision-Making Visit

Affiliations

• ¹ Respiratory Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. Electronic address: mazzonp@ccf.org.
• ² Respiratory Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.

• PMID: 27815154
• DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2016.10.027

Item in Clipboard

Peter J Mazzone et al. Chest. 2017 Mar.

• ¹ Respiratory Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. Electronic address: mazzonp@ccf.org.
• ² Respiratory Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.

• PMID: 27815154
• DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2016.10.027

Item in Clipboard

Background: Lung cancer screening is a complex balance of benefits and harms. A counseling and shared decision-making visit has been mandated to assist patients with the decision about participation in screening. To our knowledge, the impact of this visit on patient understanding and decisions has not been studied.

Methods: We developed a centralized counseling and shared decision-making visit for our lung cancer screening program. The visit included confirmation of eligibility for screening, education supported by a narrated slide show, individualized risk assessment with a decision aid, time for answering questions, and data collection. We surveyed consecutive patients prior to the visit, immediately after the visit, and 1 month after the visit to determine the impact of the visit on their knowledge.

Results: Twenty-three of 423 patients (5.4%) who had a visit did not proceed to the screening CT scan. One hundred twenty-five consecutive patients completed the initial survey, 122 completed the postvisit survey, and 113 completed the 1-month follow-up survey. Prior to the visit, the patients had a poor level of understanding about the age and smoking eligibility criteria (8.8% and 13.6% correct, respectively) and the benefits and harms of screening (55.2% and 38.4% correct, respectively). There was a significant improvement in knowledge noted after the visit for all questions (P = .03 to P < .0001). Knowledge waned by the 1-month follow-up but remained higher than it was before the visit.

Conclusions: A centralized counseling and shared decision-making visit impacts the patient's knowledge about the eligibility criteria, benefits, and harms of lung cancer screening with LDCT, helping patients make value-based decisions.

Keywords: lung cancer; screening; shared decision making.

Copyright © 2016 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PubMed Disclaimer

• Primary Care Provider and Patient Perspectives on Lung Cancer Screening. A Qualitative Study.

  Kanodra NM, Pope C, Halbert CH, Silvestri GA, Rice LJ, Tanner NT. Kanodra NM, et al. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016 Nov;13(11):1977-1982. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201604-286OC. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016. PMID: 27676369

• Low-Dose CT Scan for Lung Cancer Screening: Clinical and Coding Considerations.

  Shieh Y, Bohnenkamp M. Shieh Y, et al. Chest. 2017 Jul;152(1):204-209. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2017.03.019. Epub 2017 Mar 21. Chest. 2017. PMID: 28336485 Review.

• Pack-Year Cigarette Smoking History for Determination of Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility. Comparison of the Electronic Medical Record versus a Shared Decision-making Conversation.

  Modin HE, Fathi JT, Gilbert CR, Wilshire CL, Wilson AK, Aye RW, Farivar AS, Louie BE, Vallières E, Gorden JA. Modin HE, et al. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017 Aug;14(8):1320-1325. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201612-984OC. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017. PMID: 28406708

• What factors do patients consider most important in making lung cancer screening decisions? Findings from a demonstration project conducted in the Veterans Health Administration.

  Lillie SE, Fu SS, Fabbrini AE, Rice KL, Clothier B, Nelson DB, Doro EA, Moughrabieh MA, Partin MR. Lillie SE, et al. Lung Cancer. 2017 Feb;104:38-44. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2016.11.021. Epub 2016 Nov 29. Lung Cancer. 2017. PMID: 28212998

• Lung Cancer: Screening and Evaluation of Patients With Solitary Pulmonary Nodules.

  Mott TF. Mott TF. FP Essent. 2018 Jan;464:17-22. FP Essent. 2018. PMID: 29313653 Review.

• Knowledge and attitudes towards low dose computed tomography lung cancer screening and smoking among African Americans-a mixed method study.

  Tseng TS, Gross T, Celestin MD, Dang W, Young L, Kao YH, Li M, Smith DL, Bok LR, Fuloria J, Moody-Thomas S. Tseng TS, et al. Transl Cancer Res. 2019 Jul;8(Suppl 4):S431-S442. doi: 10.21037/tcr.2019.04.18. Transl Cancer Res. 2019. PMID: 35117119 Free PMC article.

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

  Richman IB, Prasad TV, Gross CP. Richman IB, et al. Prev Med Rep. 2022 Jul 21;29:101909. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2022.101909. eCollection 2022 Oct. Prev Med Rep. 2022. PMID: 35911579 Free PMC article.

• A pre-post study testing a lung cancer screening decision aid in primary care.

  Reuland DS, Cubillos L, Brenner AT, Harris RP, Minish B, Pignone MP. Reuland DS, et al. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018 Jan 12;18(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s12911-018-0582-1. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2018. PMID: 29325548 Free PMC article.

• What is the effect of a decision aid on knowledge, values and preferences for lung cancer screening? An online pre-post study.

  Clark SD, Reuland DS, Brenner AT, Pignone MP. Clark SD, et al. BMJ Open. 2021 Jul 9;11(7):e045160. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045160. BMJ Open. 2021. PMID: 34244253 Free PMC article.

• Interventions Designed to Increase the Uptake of Lung Cancer Screening: An Equity-Oriented Scoping Review.

  Sayani A, Ali MA, Dey P, Corrado AM, Ziegler C, Nicholson E, Lofters A. Sayani A, et al. JTO Clin Res Rep. 2023 Feb 2;4(3):100469. doi: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2023.100469. eCollection 2023 Mar. JTO Clin Res Rep. 2023. PMID: 36938372 Free PMC article.

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.3