Find in Library
Search millions of books, articles, and more
Indexed Open Access Databases
An alternating-intervention pilot trial on the impact of an informational handout on patient-reported outcomes and follow-up after lung cancer screening.
oleh: Matthew Triplette, Erin K Kross, Madison Snidarich, Shahida Shahrir, Daniel S Hippe, Kristina Crothers
Format: | Article |
---|---|
Diterbitkan: | Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2024-01-01 |
Deskripsi
<h4>Introduction</h4>Lung cancer screening (LCS) can reduce lung cancer mortality; however, poor understanding of results may impact patient experience and follow-up. We sought to determine whether an informational handout accompanying LCS results can improve patient-reported outcomes and adherence to follow-up.<h4>Study design</h4>This was a prospective alternating intervention pilot trial of a handout to accompany LCS results delivery.<h4>Setting/participants</h4>Patients undergoing LCS in a multisite program over a 6-month period received a mailing containing either: 1) a standardized form letter of LCS results (control) or 2) the LCS results letter and the handout (intervention).<h4>Intervention</h4>A two-sided informational handout on commonly asked questions after LCS created through iterative mixed-methods evaluation with both LCS patients and providers.<h4>Outcome measures</h4>The primary outcomes of 1)patient understanding of LCS results, 2)correct identification of next steps in screening, and 3)patient distress were measured through survey. Adherence to recommended follow-up after LCS was determined through chart review. Outcomes were compared between the intervention and control group using generalized estimating equations.<h4>Results</h4>389 patients were eligible and enrolled with survey responses from 230 participants (59% response rate). We found no differences in understanding of results, identification of next steps in follow-up or distress but did find higher levels of knowledge and understanding on questions assessing individual components of LCS in the intervention group. Follow-up adherence was overall similar between the two arms, though was higher in the intervention group among those with positive findings (p = 0.007).<h4>Conclusions</h4>There were no differences in self-reported outcomes between the groups or overall follow-up adherence. Those receiving the intervention did report greater understanding and knowledge of key LCS components, and those with positive results had a higher rate of follow-up. This may represent a feasible component of a multi-level intervention to address knowledge and follow-up for LCS.<h4>Trial registration</h4>ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05265897.