1
|
Tiase VL, Richards G, Taft T, Stevens L, Balbin C, Kaphingst KA, Fagerlin A, Caverly T, Kukhareva P, Flynn M, Butler JM, Kawamoto K. Patient Perspectives on a Patient-Facing Tool for Lung Cancer Screening. Health Expect 2024; 27:e14143. [PMID: 38992907 PMCID: PMC11239535 DOI: 10.1111/hex.14143] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/08/2024] [Revised: 06/02/2024] [Accepted: 06/27/2024] [Indexed: 07/13/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Individuals with high risk for lung cancer may benefit from lung cancer screening, but there are associated risks as well as benefits. Shared decision-making (SDM) tools with personalized information may provide key support for patients. Understanding patient perspectives on educational tools to facilitate SDM for lung cancer screening may support tool development. AIM This study aimed to explore patient perspectives related to a SDM tool for lung cancer screening using a qualitative approach. METHODS We elicited patient perspectives by showing a provider-facing SDM tool. Focus group interviews that ranged in duration from 1.5 to 2 h were conducted with 23 individuals with high risk for lung cancer. Data were interpreted inductively using thematic analysis to identify patients' thoughts on and desires for a patient-facing SDM tool. RESULTS The findings highlight that patients would like to have educational information related to lung cancer screening. We identified several key themes to be considered in the future development of patient-facing tools: barriers to acceptance, preference against screening and seeking empowerment. One further theme illustrated effects of patient-provider relationship as a limitation to meeting lung cancer screening information needs. Participants also noted several suggestions for the design of technology decision aids. CONCLUSION These findings suggest that patients desire additional information on lung cancer screening in advance of clinical visits. However, there are several issues that must be considered in the design and development of technology to meet the information needs of patients for lung cancer screening decisions. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION Patients, service users, caregivers or members of the public were not involved in the study design, conduct, analysis or interpretation of the data. However, clinical experts in health communication provided detailed feedback on the study protocol, including the focus group approach. The study findings contribute to a better understanding of patient expectations for lung cancer screening decisions and may inform future development of tools for SDM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Victoria L Tiase
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Grace Richards
- Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Teresa Taft
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Leticia Stevens
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Christian Balbin
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Kimberly A Kaphingst
- Department of Communication and Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Angela Fagerlin
- Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Tanner Caverly
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Polina Kukhareva
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Michael Flynn
- Departments of Internal Medicine and Pediatrics, Community Physicians Group, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Jorie M Butler
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| | - Kensaku Kawamoto
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Caverly TJ, Wiener RS, Kumbier K, Lowery J, Fagerlin A. Prediction-Augmented Shared Decision-Making and Lung Cancer Screening Uptake. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7:e2419624. [PMID: 38949809 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.19624] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/02/2024] Open
Abstract
Importance Addressing poor uptake of low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening (LCS) is critical, especially for those having the most to gain-high-benefit persons with high lung cancer risk and life expectancy more than 10 years. Objective To assess the association between LCS uptake and implementing a prediction-augmented shared decision-making (SDM) tool, which enables clinicians to identify persons predicted to be at high benefit and encourage LCS more strongly for these persons. Design, Setting, and Participants Quality improvement interrupted time series study at 6 Veterans Affairs sites that used a standard set of clinical reminders to prompt primary care clinicians and screening coordinators to engage in SDM for LCS-eligible persons. Participants were persons without a history of LCS who met LCS eligibility criteria at the time (aged 55-80 years, smoked ≥30 pack-years, and current smoking or quit <15 years ago) and were not documented to be an inappropriate candidate for LCS by a clinician during October 2017 through September 2019. Data were analyzed from September to November 2023. Exposure Decision support tool augmented by a prediction model that helps clinicians personalize SDM for LCS, tailoring the strength of screening encouragement according to predicted benefit. Main outcome and measure LCS uptake. Results In a cohort of 9904 individuals, the median (IQR) age was 64 (57-69) years; 9277 (94%) were male, 1537 (16%) were Black, 8159 (82%) were White, 5153 (52%) were predicted to be at intermediate (preference-sensitive) benefit and 4751 (48%) at high benefit, and 1084 (11%) received screening during the study period. Following implementation of the tool, higher rates of LCS uptake were observed overall along with an increase in benefit-based LCS uptake (higher screening uptake among persons anticipated to be at high benefit compared with those at intermediate benefit; primary analysis). Mean (SD) predicted probability of getting screened for a high-benefit person was 24.8% (15.5%) vs 15.8% (11.8%) for a person at intermediate benefit (mean absolute difference 9.0 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.6%-16.5%). Conclusions and Relevance Implementing a robust approach to personalized LCS, which integrates SDM, and a decision support tool augmented by a prediction model, are associated with improved uptake of LCS and may be particularly important for those most likely to benefit. These findings are timely given the ongoing poor rates of LCS uptake.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tanner J Caverly
- Center for Clinical Management Research, Department of Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Department of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor
| | - Renda S Wiener
- The Pulmonary Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
- Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial Veterans Hospital, Bedford, Massachusetts
| | - Kyle Kumbier
- Center for Clinical Management Research, Department of Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Julie Lowery
- Center for Clinical Management Research, Department of Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan
| | - Angela Fagerlin
- University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City
- Informatics Decision-Enhancement and Analytic Sciences (IDEAS) Center for Innovation, Department of Veterans Affairs Salt Lake City Healthcare System, Salt Lake City, Utah
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wainwright JV, Aggarwal C, Beucker S, Dougherty DW, Gabriel PE, Jacobs LA, Kalman J, Linn KA, Martella AO, Mehta SJ, Rhodes CM, Roy M, Schapira MM, Shulman LN, Steltz J, Stephens Shields AJ, Tan ASL, Thompson JC, Toneff H, Wender RC, Zeb S, Rendle KA, Vachani A, Bekelman JE. University of Pennsylvania Telehealth Research Center of Excellence. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2024; 2024:62-69. [PMID: 38924794 PMCID: PMC11207744 DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgae011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2023] [Revised: 01/17/2024] [Accepted: 02/16/2024] [Indexed: 06/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Drawing from insights from communication science and behavioral economics, the University of Pennsylvania Telehealth Research Center of Excellence (Penn TRACE) is designing and testing telehealth strategies with the potential to transform access to care, care quality, outcomes, health equity, and health-care efficiency across the cancer care continuum, with an emphasis on understanding mechanisms of action. Penn TRACE uses lung cancer care as an exemplar model for telehealth across the care continuum, from screening to treatment to survivorship. We bring together a diverse and interdisciplinary team of international experts and incorporate rapid-cycle approaches and mixed methods evaluation in all center projects. Our initiatives include a pragmatic sequential multiple assignment randomized trial to compare the effectiveness of telehealth strategies to increase shared decision-making for lung cancer screening and 2 pilot projects to test the effectiveness of telehealth to improve cancer care, identify multilevel mechanisms of action, and lay the foundation for future pragmatic trials. Penn TRACE aims to produce new fundamental knowledge and advance telehealth science in cancer care at Penn and nationally.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jocelyn V Wainwright
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Charu Aggarwal
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Abramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Sarah Beucker
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - David W Dougherty
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Abramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Peter E Gabriel
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Abramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Linda A Jacobs
- Abramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jillian Kalman
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Kristin A Linn
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Anthony O Martella
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Abramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Shivan J Mehta
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Corinne M Rhodes
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Megan Roy
- Abramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Marilyn M Schapira
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Corporal Michael J. Crescenz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Lawrence N Shulman
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Abramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jennifer Steltz
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Alisa J Stephens Shields
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Andy S L Tan
- Annenberg School for Communications, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jeffrey C Thompson
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Hannah Toneff
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Richard C Wender
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Sana Zeb
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Katharine A Rendle
- Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Abramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Anil Vachani
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Corporal Michael J. Crescenz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Justin E Bekelman
- Penn Center for Cancer Care Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Abramson Cancer Center, Penn Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Kukhareva PV, Li H, Caverly TJ, Fagerlin A, Del Fiol G, Hess R, Zhang Y, Butler JM, Schlechter C, Flynn MC, Reddy C, Choi J, Balbin C, Warner IA, Warner PB, Nanjo C, Kawamoto, K. Lung Cancer Screening Before and After a Multifaceted Electronic Health Record Intervention: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7:e2415383. [PMID: 38848065 PMCID: PMC11161845 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.15383] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/16/2023] [Accepted: 03/24/2024] [Indexed: 06/10/2024] Open
Abstract
Importance Lung cancer is the deadliest cancer in the US. Early-stage lung cancer detection with lung cancer screening (LCS) through low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) improves outcomes. Objective To assess the association of a multifaceted clinical decision support intervention with rates of identification and completion of recommended LCS-related services. Design, Setting, and Participants This nonrandomized controlled trial used an interrupted time series design, including 3 study periods from August 24, 2019, to April 27, 2022: baseline (12 months), period 1 (11 months), and period 2 (9 months). Outcome changes were reported as shifts in the outcome level at the beginning of each period and changes in monthly trend (ie, slope). The study was conducted at primary care and pulmonary clinics at a health care system headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, among patients aged 55 to 80 years who had smoked 30 pack-years or more and were current smokers or had quit smoking in the past 15 years. Data were analyzed from September 2023 through February 2024. Interventions Interventions in period 1 included clinician-facing preventive care reminders, an electronic health record-integrated shared decision-making tool, and narrative LCS guidance provided in the LDCT ordering screen. Interventions in period 2 included the same clinician-facing interventions and patient-facing reminders for LCS discussion and LCS. Main Outcome and Measure The primary outcome was LCS care gap closure, defined as the identification and completion of recommended care services. LCS care gap closure could be achieved through LDCT completion, other chest CT completion, or LCS shared decision-making. Results The study included 1865 patients (median [IQR] age, 64 [60-70] years; 759 female [40.7%]). The clinician-facing intervention (period 1) was not associated with changes in level but was associated with an increase in slope of 2.6 percentage points (95% CI, 2.4-2.7 percentage points) per month in care gap closure through any means and 1.6 percentage points (95% CI, 1.4-1.8 percentage points) per month in closure through LDCT. In period 2, introduction of patient-facing reminders was associated with an immediate increase in care gap closure (2.3 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.0-3.6 percentage points) and closure through LDCT (2.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.9-3.9 percentage points) but was not associated with an increase in slope. The overall care gap closure rate was 175 of 1104 patients (15.9%) at the end of the baseline period vs 588 of 1255 patients (46.9%) at the end of period 2. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, a multifaceted intervention was associated with an improvement in LCS care gap closure. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04498052.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Haojia Li
- Study Design and Biostatistics Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Tanner J. Caverly
- Center for Clinical Management Research, Department of Veterans Affairs, Ann Arbor, Michigan
- Department of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
| | - Angela Fagerlin
- Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
- Salt Lake City VA Informatics Decision-Enhancement and Analytic Sciences Center for Innovation, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Guilherme Del Fiol
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Rachel Hess
- Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Yue Zhang
- Study Design and Biostatistics Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Jorie M. Butler
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
- Geriatrics Research and Education Center, George E. Wahlen Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Chelsey Schlechter
- Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Michael C. Flynn
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
- Community Physicians Group, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City
| | - Chakravarthy Reddy
- Study Design and Biostatistics Center, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Joshua Choi
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Christian Balbin
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Isaac A. Warner
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Phillip B. Warner
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Claude Nanjo
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| | - Kensaku Kawamoto,
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Odole IP, Andersen M, Richman IB. Digital Interventions to Support Lung Cancer Screening: A Systematic Review. Am J Prev Med 2024; 66:899-908. [PMID: 38246408 DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2024.01.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/17/2023] [Revised: 01/10/2024] [Accepted: 01/10/2024] [Indexed: 01/23/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Lung cancer remains a leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) can reduce lung cancer mortality, but its adoption in the U.S. has been limited. Digital interventions have the potential to improve uptake of LCS. This systematic review aims to summarize the evidence for the effectiveness of digital interventions in promoting LCS. METHODS A systematic search of three electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Medline) was conducted to identify studies published between January 2014 and May 2023. Studies were reviewed and abstracted between February 2023 and July 2023. Outcomes related to knowledge, decision-making and screening were measured. Study quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools. RESULTS Of 1,979 screened articles, 30 studies were included in this review. Digital interventions evaluated included decision aids (n=20), electronic health record (EHR)-based interventions (n=7), social media campaigns and mobile applications (n=3). Decision aids were the most commonly studied digital interventions, with most studies showing improved knowledge (13/13) and reduced decisional conflict (7/9) but most did not show a substantial change in screening use. Fewer studies tested clinician-facing or multi-level interventions. DISCUSSION Digital interventions, particularly decision aids, have shown promise in improving knowledge and the quality of decision-making around LCS. However, few interventions have been shown to substantially alter screening behavior and few clinician-facing or multi-level interventions have been rigorously tested. Further research is needed to develop effective tools for engaging patients in LCS, to compare the efficacy of different interventions, and evaluate implementation strategies in diverse healthcare settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Ilana B Richman
- Department of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Williams RM, Whealan J, Taylor KL, Adams-Campbell L, Miller KE, Foley K, Luta G, Brandt H, Glassmeyer K, Sangraula A, Yee P, Camidge K, Blumenthal J, Modi S, Kratz H. Multilevel approaches to address disparities in lung cancer screening: a study protocol. Implement Sci Commun 2024; 5:15. [PMID: 38365820 PMCID: PMC10870584 DOI: 10.1186/s43058-024-00553-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2023] [Accepted: 02/01/2024] [Indexed: 02/18/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Low-dose computed tomography (lung cancer screening) can reduce lung cancer-specific mortality by 20-24%. Based on this evidence, the United States Preventive Services Task Force recommends annual lung cancer screening for asymptomatic high-risk individuals. Despite this recommendation, utilization is low (3-20%). Lung cancer screening may be particularly beneficial for African American patients because they are more likely to have advanced disease, lower survival, and lower screening rates compared to White individuals. Evidence points to multilevel approaches that simultaneously address multiple determinants to increase screening rates and decrease lung cancer burden in minoritized populations. This study will test the effects of provider- and patient-level strategies for promoting equitable lung cancer screening utilization. METHODS Guided by the Health Disparities Research Framework and the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model, we will conduct a quasi-experimental study with four primary care clinics within a large health system (MedStar Health). Individuals eligible for lung cancer screening, defined as 50-80 years old, ≥ 20 pack-years, currently smoking, or quit < 15 years, no history of lung cancer, who have an appointment scheduled with their provider, and who are non-adherent to screening will be identified via the EHR, contacted, and enrolled (N = 184 for implementation clinics, N = 184 for comparison clinics; total N = 368). Provider participants will include those practicing at the partner clinics (N = 26). To increase provider-prompted discussions about lung screening, an electronic health record (EHR) clinician reminder will be sent to providers prior to scheduled visits with the screening-eligible participants. To increase patient-level knowledge and patient activation about screening, an inreach specialist will conduct a pre-visit phone-based educational session with participants. Patient participants will be assessed at baseline and 1-week post-visit to measure provider-patient discussion, screening intentions, and knowledge. Screening referrals and screening completion rates will be assessed via the EHR at 6 months. We will use mixed methods and multilevel assessments of patients and providers to evaluate the implementation outcomes (adoption, feasibility, acceptability, and fidelity). DISCUSSION The study will inform future work designed to measure the independent and overlapping contributions of the multilevel implementation strategies to advance equity in lung screening rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04675476. Registered December 19, 2020.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Randi M Williams
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA.
| | - Julia Whealan
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Kathryn L Taylor
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Lucile Adams-Campbell
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | | | - Kristie Foley
- Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
| | - George Luta
- Department of Biostatistics, Bioinformatics, and Biomathematics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Heather Brandt
- Epidemiology and Cancer Control Department, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Katharine Glassmeyer
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Anu Sangraula
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Peyton Yee
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Kaylin Camidge
- Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
| | | | | | - Heather Kratz
- The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Stevens ER, Caverly T, Butler JM, Kukhareva P, Richardson S, Mann DM, Kawamoto K. Considerations for using predictive models that include race as an input variable: The case study of lung cancer screening. J Biomed Inform 2023; 147:104525. [PMID: 37844677 PMCID: PMC11221602 DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104525] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2023] [Revised: 10/06/2023] [Accepted: 10/13/2023] [Indexed: 10/18/2023]
Abstract
Indiscriminate use of predictive models incorporating race can reinforce biases present in source data and lead to an exacerbation of health disparities. In some countries, such as the United States, there is therefore a push to remove race from prediction models; however, there are still many prediction models that use race as an input. Biomedical informaticists who are given the responsibility of using these predictive models in healthcare environments are likely to be faced with questions like how to deal with race covariates in these models. Thus, there is a need for a pragmatic framework to help model users think through how to include race in their chosen model so as to avoid inadvertently exacerbating disparities. In this paper, we use the case study of lung cancer screening to propose a simple framework to guide how model users can approach the use (or non-use) of race inputs in the predictive models they are tasked with leveraging in electronic health records and clinical workflows.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elizabeth R Stevens
- Department of Population Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, United States.
| | - Tanner Caverly
- University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, United States
| | - Jorie M Butler
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| | - Polina Kukhareva
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| | - Safiya Richardson
- Department of Population Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, United States
| | - Devin M Mann
- Department of Population Health, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY, United States; Medical Center Information Technology, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, United States
| | - Kensaku Kawamoto
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, UT, United States
| |
Collapse
|