Sara E. Golden , Liana Schweiger , Sarah Ono , Anne C. Melzer , Santanu Datta , James Davis , Christopher Slatore
{"title":"\"自从收到那封信,我真的很开心!\":患者对肺癌筛查沟通的纵向看法。","authors":"Sara E. Golden , Liana Schweiger , Sarah Ono , Anne C. Melzer , Santanu Datta , James Davis , Christopher Slatore","doi":"10.1016/j.ypmed.2024.108142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Experts recommend structured shared decision making when discussing lung cancer screening (LCS) and reporting low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) results. We examined patients' reactions to pre- and post-LDCT results communication processes at three medical centers in the US with established LCS programs.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Multicenter, qualitative, longitudinal study of patients considering and receiving LCS using data from semi-structured interviews guided by a patient-centered communication model using conventional content analysis. We conducted 61 interviews among 32 patients (sixteen of whom had a nodule on their LDCT) at one month and 12 months after an initial LCS decision making interaction.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Participants were mostly satisfied with LCS communication processes pre- and post-LDCT even though guideline concordant shared decision making was rare. Most participants reported no more than mild distress even if the LDCT detected a pulmonary nodule, felt relief after getting the results, and reported the perceived benefits of LCS outweighed their distress. Nearly all participants were satisfied with recommended follow-up plans. They reported that they trusted their clinicians and health care system to provide appropriate care and recommendations. They did not appear to regret their decision since almost all participants planned to get their next LDCT. However, they were at risk of non-adherence to follow-up recommendations since they often relied on the health care system to ensure they received timely follow-up.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Despite receiving guideline discordant decision-making communication, patients seem very satisfied, rarely experience severe distress, and have low decisional regret after LCS decision making and receiving the results of their LDCT.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":20339,"journal":{"name":"Preventive medicine","volume":"189 ","pages":"Article 108142"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"“I've been really happy since I got that letter!”: Longitudinal patient perspectives on lung cancer screening communication\",\"authors\":\"Sara E. Golden , Liana Schweiger , Sarah Ono , Anne C. Melzer , Santanu Datta , James Davis , Christopher Slatore\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ypmed.2024.108142\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Experts recommend structured shared decision making when discussing lung cancer screening (LCS) and reporting low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) results. We examined patients' reactions to pre- and post-LDCT results communication processes at three medical centers in the US with established LCS programs.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Multicenter, qualitative, longitudinal study of patients considering and receiving LCS using data from semi-structured interviews guided by a patient-centered communication model using conventional content analysis. We conducted 61 interviews among 32 patients (sixteen of whom had a nodule on their LDCT) at one month and 12 months after an initial LCS decision making interaction.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Participants were mostly satisfied with LCS communication processes pre- and post-LDCT even though guideline concordant shared decision making was rare. Most participants reported no more than mild distress even if the LDCT detected a pulmonary nodule, felt relief after getting the results, and reported the perceived benefits of LCS outweighed their distress. Nearly all participants were satisfied with recommended follow-up plans. They reported that they trusted their clinicians and health care system to provide appropriate care and recommendations. They did not appear to regret their decision since almost all participants planned to get their next LDCT. However, they were at risk of non-adherence to follow-up recommendations since they often relied on the health care system to ensure they received timely follow-up.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Despite receiving guideline discordant decision-making communication, patients seem very satisfied, rarely experience severe distress, and have low decisional regret after LCS decision making and receiving the results of their LDCT.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20339,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Preventive medicine\",\"volume\":\"189 \",\"pages\":\"Article 108142\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Preventive medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091743524002974\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Preventive medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0091743524002974","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
“I've been really happy since I got that letter!”: Longitudinal patient perspectives on lung cancer screening communication
Objective
Experts recommend structured shared decision making when discussing lung cancer screening (LCS) and reporting low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) results. We examined patients' reactions to pre- and post-LDCT results communication processes at three medical centers in the US with established LCS programs.
Methods
Multicenter, qualitative, longitudinal study of patients considering and receiving LCS using data from semi-structured interviews guided by a patient-centered communication model using conventional content analysis. We conducted 61 interviews among 32 patients (sixteen of whom had a nodule on their LDCT) at one month and 12 months after an initial LCS decision making interaction.
Results
Participants were mostly satisfied with LCS communication processes pre- and post-LDCT even though guideline concordant shared decision making was rare. Most participants reported no more than mild distress even if the LDCT detected a pulmonary nodule, felt relief after getting the results, and reported the perceived benefits of LCS outweighed their distress. Nearly all participants were satisfied with recommended follow-up plans. They reported that they trusted their clinicians and health care system to provide appropriate care and recommendations. They did not appear to regret their decision since almost all participants planned to get their next LDCT. However, they were at risk of non-adherence to follow-up recommendations since they often relied on the health care system to ensure they received timely follow-up.
Conclusions
Despite receiving guideline discordant decision-making communication, patients seem very satisfied, rarely experience severe distress, and have low decisional regret after LCS decision making and receiving the results of their LDCT.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1972 by Ernst Wynder, Preventive Medicine is an international scholarly journal that provides prompt publication of original articles on the science and practice of disease prevention, health promotion, and public health policymaking. Preventive Medicine aims to reward innovation. It will favor insightful observational studies, thoughtful explorations of health data, unsuspected new angles for existing hypotheses, robust randomized controlled trials, and impartial systematic reviews. Preventive Medicine''s ultimate goal is to publish research that will have an impact on the work of practitioners of disease prevention and health promotion, as well as of related disciplines.