Dataset Information

A national survey of primary care physicians: Perceptions and practices of low-dose CT lung cancer screening.

ABSTRACT: Soon after the National Lung Screening Trial, organizations began to endorse low-dose computed tomography (LCDT) screening for lung cancer in high-risk patients. Concerns about the risks versus benefits of screening, as well as the logistics of identifying and referring eligible patients, remained among physicians. This study aimed to examine primary care physicians' knowledge, attitudes, referral practices, and associated barriers regarding LDCT screening. We administered a national survey of primary care physicians in the United States between September 2016 and April 2017. Physicians received up to 3 mailings, 1 follow-up email, and received varying incentives to complete the survey. Overall, 293 physicians participated, for a response rate of 13%. We used weighted descriptive statistics to characterize participants and their responses. Over half of the respondents correctly reported that the US Preventive Services Task Force recommends LDCT screening for high-risk patients. Screening recommendations for patients not meeting high-risk criteria varied. Although 75% agreed that the benefits of LDCT screening outweigh the risks, fewer agreed that there is substantial evidence that screening reduces mortality (50%). The most commonly reported barriers to ordering screening included prior authorization requirements (57%), lack of insurance coverage (53%), and coverage denials (31%). The most frequently cited barrier to conducting LDCT screening shared decision making was patients' competing health priorities (42%). Given the impact of physician recommendations on cancer screening utilization, further understanding of physicians' LDCT screening attitudes and shared decision-making practices is needed. Clinical practice and policy changes are also needed to engage more patients in screening discussions.

SUBMITTER: Eberth JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6030390 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A national survey of primary care physicians: Perceptions and practices of low-dose CT lung cancer screening.

Eberth Jan M JM McDonnell Karen Kane KK Sercy Erica E Khan Samira S Strayer Scott M SM Dievendorf Amy C AC Munden Reginald F RF Vernon Sally W SW

Preventive medicine reports 20180522

Soon after the National Lung Screening Trial, organizations began to endorse low-dose computed tomography (LCDT) screening for lung cancer in high-risk patients. Concerns about the risks versus benefits of screening, as well as the logistics of identifying and referring eligible patients, remained among physicians. This study aimed to examine primary care physicians' knowledge, attitudes, referral practices, and associated barriers regarding LDCT screening. We administered a national survey of p ...[more]

PMID: 29984145

Similar Datasets

Project description:Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening reduces lung cancer-specific and overall mortality. We sought to assess lung cancer screening practices and attitudes among primary care providers (PCPs) in the era of new LDCT screening guidelines.In 2013, we surveyed PCPs at an academic medical center (60% response) and assessed: lung cancer screening use, perceived screening effectiveness, knowledge of screening guidelines, perceived barriers to LDCT use, and interest in LDCT screening education.Few PCPs (n = 212) reported ordering lung cancer screening: chest X-ray (21%), LDCT (12%), and sputum cytology (3%). Only 47% of providers knew three or more of six guideline components for LDCT screening; 24% did not know any guideline components. In multiple logistic regression analysis, providers who knew three or more guideline components were more likely to order LDCT (OR, 7.1; 95% confidence intervals, 2.0-25.6). Many providers (30%) were unsure of the effectiveness of LDCT. Mammography, colonoscopy, and Pap smear were rated more frequently as effective in reducing cancer mortality compared with LDCT (all P values < 0.0001). Common perceived barriers included patient cost (86.9% major or minor barrier), harm from false positives (82.7%), patients' lack of awareness (81.3%), risk of incidental findings (81.3%), and insurance coverage (80.1%).LDCT lung cancer screening is currently an uncommon practice at an academic medical center. PCPs report ordering chest X-ray, a nonrecommended screening test, more often than LDCT. PCPs had a limited understanding of lung cancer screening guidelines and LDCT effectiveness. Provider educational interventions are needed to facilitate shared decision-making with patients.This study describes some of the first data available about PCPs' use of lung cancer screening tests since the publication of multiple professional guidelines endorsing LDCT. Knowledge gaps were identified that may hinder the uptake of evidence-based lung cancer screening guidelines.

Project description:BackgroundMolecular oncology testing (MOT) to detect genomic alterations underlying cancer holds promise for improved cancer care. Yet knowledge limitations regarding the delivery of testing services may constrain the translation of scientific advancements into effective health care.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional, self-administered, postal survey of active cancer physicians in Ontario, Canada (N = 611) likely to order MOT, and cancer laboratories (N = 99) likely to refer (i.e., referring laboratories) or conduct (i.e., testing laboratories) MOT in 2006, to assess respondents' perceptions of the importance and accessibility of MOT and their preparedness to provide it.Results54% of physicians, 63% of testing laboratories and 60% of referring laboratories responded. Most perceived MOT to be important for treatment, diagnosis or prognosis now, and in 5 years (61% - 100%). Yet only 45% of physicians, 59% of testing labs and 53% of referring labs agreed that patients in their region were receiving MOT that is indicated as a standard of care. Physicians and laboratories perceived various barriers to providing MOT, including, among 70% of physicians, a lack of clear guidelines regarding clinical indications, and among laboratories, a lack of funding (73% - 100%). Testing laboratories were confident of their ability to determine whether and which MOT was indicated (77% and 82% respectively), and perceived that key elements of formal and continuing education were helpful (75% - 100%). By contrast, minorities of physicians were confident of their ability to assess whether and which MOT was indicated (46% and 34% respectively), and while majorities considered various continuing educational resources helpful (68% - 75%), only minorities considered key elements of formal education helpful in preparing for MOT (17% - 43%).ConclusionPhysicians and laboratory professionals were enthusiastic about the value of MOT for cancer care but most did not believe patients were gaining adequate access to clinically necessary testing. Further, our results suggest that many were ill equipped as individual stakeholders, or as a coordinated system of referral and interpretation, to provide MOT. These challenges should inspire educational, training and other interventions to ensure that developments in molecular oncology can result in optimal cancer care.

Project description:ObjectivesTo describe the activities of general practitioners (GPs) pertaining to primary prevention in the field of affective and sexual life, studying the advice they provide as well as their vaccination practices.DesignCross-sectional national survey.Setting/participantsThe study was carried out using the Swiss Primary Care Active Monitoring GPs' network, a national GP network created in 2012. One hundred and seventy Swiss GPs, from a random sample from professional lists stratified by canton, participated in the present study.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrevention practices against sexually transmitted infections (STIs) performed by GPs through advice provided as well as their vaccination practices. Predictive factor of these practices through their links with the doctors' relevant characteristics and their opinions about STI prevention.ResultsApproximately 80% consider prevention in the area of affective and sexual life to be part of their duty and discuss it easily with patients. Most of them spontaneously give advice regarding STIs during a routine consultation. Regarding human papillomavirus (HPV) immunisation in adults, almost half of GPs report never doing it, while almost 75% often or always immunise their adult patients against hepatitis B. Higher numbers of consultations per day are associated with vaccinating more adults against HPV (OR 1.13 (1.05 to 1.23)) and against hepatitis A (OR 1.17 (1.05 to 1.31)). Vaccinating children against hepatitis B is associated with practising in rural areas (OR 4.64 (1.20 to 17.98)). GPs practising in the French-speaking region of Switzerland immunise children less against HPV (OR 0.40 (0.20 to 0.80)). Longer consultations are associated with providing advice on affective and sexual life during a first consultation (OR 1.08 (1.01 to 1.14)).ConclusionSwiss GPs are involved in primary prevention against STIs and consider it as their responsibility. Prevention practices are associated with GPs' favourable opinions on prevention.

Dataset Information

A national survey of primary care physicians: Perceptions and practices of low-dose CT lung cancer screening.

Publications

A national survey of primary care physicians: Perceptions and practices of low-dose CT lung cancer screening.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets