Understanding the decision to screen for lung cancer or not: A qualitative analysis

Claire Burke Draucker, Susan M. Rawl, Emilee Vode, Lisa Carter-Harris

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: Although new screening programmes with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer have been implemented throughout the United States, screening uptake remains low and screening-eligible persons' decisions to screen or not remain poorly understood. Objective: To describe how current and former long-term smokers explain their decisions regarding participation in lung cancer screening. Design: Phone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide were conducted to ask screening-eligible persons to describe their decisions regarding screening with LDCT. The interviews were transcribed and analysed with conventional content analytic techniques. Setting and participants: A subsample of 40 participants (20 who had screened and 20 who had not) were drawn from the sample of a survey study whose participants were recruited by Facebook targeted advertisements. Results: The sample was divided into the following five groups based on their decisions regarding lung cancer screening participation: Group 1: no intention to be screened, Group 2: no deliberate consideration but somewhat open to being screened, Group 3: deliberate consideration but no definitive decision to be screened, Group 4: intention to be screened and Group 5: had been screened. Reasons for screening participation decisions are described for each group. Across groups, data revealed that screening-eligible persons have a number of misconceptions regarding LDCT, including that a scan is needed only if one is symptomatic or has not had a chest x-ray. A physician recommendation was a key influence on decisions to screen. Discussion and conclusions: Education initiatives aimed at providers and long-term smokers regarding LDCT is needed. Quality patient/provider communication is most likely to improve screening rates.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalHealth Expectations
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Lung Neoplasms
Tomography
Interviews
Early Detection of Cancer
Thorax
Communication
X-Rays
Physicians
Education

Keywords

  • behaviour
  • long-term smokers
  • lung cancer screening
  • qualitative

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Understanding the decision to screen for lung cancer or not : A qualitative analysis. / Draucker, Claire Burke; Rawl, Susan M.; Vode, Emilee; Carter-Harris, Lisa.

In: Health Expectations, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b28ea03724fa44f5b8994efafb2e52dc,
title = "Understanding the decision to screen for lung cancer or not: A qualitative analysis",
abstract = "Background: Although new screening programmes with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer have been implemented throughout the United States, screening uptake remains low and screening-eligible persons' decisions to screen or not remain poorly understood. Objective: To describe how current and former long-term smokers explain their decisions regarding participation in lung cancer screening. Design: Phone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide were conducted to ask screening-eligible persons to describe their decisions regarding screening with LDCT. The interviews were transcribed and analysed with conventional content analytic techniques. Setting and participants: A subsample of 40 participants (20 who had screened and 20 who had not) were drawn from the sample of a survey study whose participants were recruited by Facebook targeted advertisements. Results: The sample was divided into the following five groups based on their decisions regarding lung cancer screening participation: Group 1: no intention to be screened, Group 2: no deliberate consideration but somewhat open to being screened, Group 3: deliberate consideration but no definitive decision to be screened, Group 4: intention to be screened and Group 5: had been screened. Reasons for screening participation decisions are described for each group. Across groups, data revealed that screening-eligible persons have a number of misconceptions regarding LDCT, including that a scan is needed only if one is symptomatic or has not had a chest x-ray. A physician recommendation was a key influence on decisions to screen. Discussion and conclusions: Education initiatives aimed at providers and long-term smokers regarding LDCT is needed. Quality patient/provider communication is most likely to improve screening rates.",
keywords = "behaviour, long-term smokers, lung cancer screening, qualitative",
author = "Draucker, {Claire Burke} and Rawl, {Susan M.} and Emilee Vode and Lisa Carter-Harris",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/hex.12975",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Health Expectations",
issn = "1369-6513",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Understanding the decision to screen for lung cancer or not

T2 - A qualitative analysis

AU - Draucker, Claire Burke

AU - Rawl, Susan M.

AU - Vode, Emilee

AU - Carter-Harris, Lisa

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Background: Although new screening programmes with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer have been implemented throughout the United States, screening uptake remains low and screening-eligible persons' decisions to screen or not remain poorly understood. Objective: To describe how current and former long-term smokers explain their decisions regarding participation in lung cancer screening. Design: Phone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide were conducted to ask screening-eligible persons to describe their decisions regarding screening with LDCT. The interviews were transcribed and analysed with conventional content analytic techniques. Setting and participants: A subsample of 40 participants (20 who had screened and 20 who had not) were drawn from the sample of a survey study whose participants were recruited by Facebook targeted advertisements. Results: The sample was divided into the following five groups based on their decisions regarding lung cancer screening participation: Group 1: no intention to be screened, Group 2: no deliberate consideration but somewhat open to being screened, Group 3: deliberate consideration but no definitive decision to be screened, Group 4: intention to be screened and Group 5: had been screened. Reasons for screening participation decisions are described for each group. Across groups, data revealed that screening-eligible persons have a number of misconceptions regarding LDCT, including that a scan is needed only if one is symptomatic or has not had a chest x-ray. A physician recommendation was a key influence on decisions to screen. Discussion and conclusions: Education initiatives aimed at providers and long-term smokers regarding LDCT is needed. Quality patient/provider communication is most likely to improve screening rates.

AB - Background: Although new screening programmes with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer have been implemented throughout the United States, screening uptake remains low and screening-eligible persons' decisions to screen or not remain poorly understood. Objective: To describe how current and former long-term smokers explain their decisions regarding participation in lung cancer screening. Design: Phone interviews using a semi-structured interview guide were conducted to ask screening-eligible persons to describe their decisions regarding screening with LDCT. The interviews were transcribed and analysed with conventional content analytic techniques. Setting and participants: A subsample of 40 participants (20 who had screened and 20 who had not) were drawn from the sample of a survey study whose participants were recruited by Facebook targeted advertisements. Results: The sample was divided into the following five groups based on their decisions regarding lung cancer screening participation: Group 1: no intention to be screened, Group 2: no deliberate consideration but somewhat open to being screened, Group 3: deliberate consideration but no definitive decision to be screened, Group 4: intention to be screened and Group 5: had been screened. Reasons for screening participation decisions are described for each group. Across groups, data revealed that screening-eligible persons have a number of misconceptions regarding LDCT, including that a scan is needed only if one is symptomatic or has not had a chest x-ray. A physician recommendation was a key influence on decisions to screen. Discussion and conclusions: Education initiatives aimed at providers and long-term smokers regarding LDCT is needed. Quality patient/provider communication is most likely to improve screening rates.

KW - behaviour

KW - long-term smokers

KW - lung cancer screening

KW - qualitative

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073919196&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85073919196&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/hex.12975

DO - 10.1111/hex.12975

M3 - Article

C2 - 31560837

AN - SCOPUS:85073919196

JO - Health Expectations

JF - Health Expectations

SN - 1369-6513

ER -