Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Chest. 2017 Jul;152(1):70-80. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2017.02.012. Epub 2017 Feb 20.

Evaluations of Implementation at Early-Adopting Lung Cancer Screening Programs: Lessons Learned.

Author information

1
Pulmonary Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA.
2
Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA; Center for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial VA Hospital, Bedford, Bedford, MA.
3
Center for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial VA Hospital, Bedford, Bedford, MA.
4
Center to Improve Veteran Involvement in Care, VA Portland Health Care System, Portland, OR; Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR.
5
Pulmonary Section, VA Boston HealthCare System, Boston, MA.
6
VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT; Section of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
7
Health Equity and Rural Outreach Innovation Center, RHJ VA Hospital, Charleston, SC; Division of Pulmonary Critical Care, Department of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC.
8
Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value-Driven Care, VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA; Division of Pulmonary Critical Care Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
9
Pulmonary Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA; Center for Healthcare Organization & Implementation Research, Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial VA Hospital, Bedford, Bedford, MA. Electronic address: rwiener@bu.edu.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Guidelines recommend lung cancer screening (LCS), and it is currently being adopted nationwide. The American College of Chest Physicians advises inclusion of specific programmatic components to ensure high-quality screening. However, little is known about how LCS has been implemented in practice. We sought to evaluate the experience of early-adopting programs, characterize barriers faced, and identify strategies to achieve successful implementation.

METHODS:

We performed qualitative evaluations of LCS implementation at three Veterans Administration facilities, conducting semistructured interviews with key staff (n = 29). Guided by the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services framework, we analyzed transcripts using principals of grounded theory.

RESULTS:

Programs successfully incorporated most recommended elements of LCS, although varying in approaches to patient selection, tobacco treatment, and quality audits. Barriers to implementation included managing workload to ensure appropriate evaluation of pulmonary nodules detected by screening and difficulty obtaining primary care "buy-in." To manage workload, programs used nurse coordinators to actively maintain screening registries, held multidisciplinary conferences that generated explicit management recommendations, and rolled out implementation in a staged fashion. Successful strategies to engage primary care providers included educational sessions, audit and feedback of local outcomes, and assisting with and assigning clear responsibility for nodule evaluation. Capitalizing on pre-existing relationships and including a designated program champion helped facilitate intradisciplinary communication.

CONCLUSIONS:

Lung cancer screening implementation is a complex undertaking requiring coordination at many levels. The insight gained from evaluation of these early-adopting programs may inform subsequent design and implementation of LCS programs.

KEYWORDS:

cancer screening; implementation science; lung cancer; program evaluation

PMID:
28223153
DOI:
10.1016/j.chest.2017.02.012
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center