An alternating-intervention pilot trial on the impact of an informational handout on patient-reported outcomes and follow-up after lung cancer screening.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2024
2024
Historique:
received:
19
06
2023
accepted:
20
02
2024
medline:
10
4
2024
pubmed:
10
4
2024
entrez:
10
4
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
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. This was a prospective alternating intervention pilot trial of a handout to accompany LCS results delivery. 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). A two-sided informational handout on commonly asked questions after LCS created through iterative mixed-methods evaluation with both LCS patients and providers. 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. 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). 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. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05265897.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38598511
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300352
pii: PONE-D-23-16862
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT05265897']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0300352Informations de copyright
Copyright: This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Mr. Hippe reports research grants from GE Healthcare, Philips Healthcare, and Canon Medical Systems USA outside the submitted work. The other authors have no other competing interests to report.