Barriers to Integrating Tobacco Dependence Treatment into Lung Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Assessment.

IF 3 Q1 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
Deborah L Pestka, Megan E Campbell, Naomi A Schmulewitz, Anne C Melzer
{"title":"Barriers to Integrating Tobacco Dependence Treatment into Lung Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Assessment.","authors":"Deborah L Pestka, Megan E Campbell, Naomi A Schmulewitz, Anne C Melzer","doi":"10.1177/21501319251321608","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction/objective: </strong>We qualitatively assessed current practices and perceived barriers surrounding the integration of tobacco dependence treatment (TDT) into lung cancer screening (LCS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Informed by the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model, we conducted semi-structured interviews with clinicians (<i>n</i> = 18) at 6 Veterans Affairs medical centers in the Midwest.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>TDT was usually addressed at an initial shared decision-making visit but often not with subsequent rounds of screening or nodule follow-up. No site was aware that any TDT-related outcomes were tracked within their program. While the LCS clinical reminders included some aspects of tobacco use (eg, tobacco pack-years), they did not support clinicians in offering TDT or capture outcomes and were perceived as \"checkboxes to nowhere.\" This was contrasted with other clinical reminders linked to dashboards that provide rolling feedback for important clinical outcomes (eg, diabetes care). Interviewees reported competing demands and limited expertise in motivational interventions as additional barriers. A dedicated team for TDT and a \"one-click referral\" were perceived as key success factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TDT remains poorly integrated into LCS. Addressing identified barriers will require considerable investment in TDT resources and improvements to LCS tools to support the provision of cessation support.</p>","PeriodicalId":46723,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","volume":"16 ","pages":"21501319251321608"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11851765/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Primary Care and Community Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21501319251321608","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction/objective: We qualitatively assessed current practices and perceived barriers surrounding the integration of tobacco dependence treatment (TDT) into lung cancer screening (LCS).

Methods: Informed by the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model, we conducted semi-structured interviews with clinicians (n = 18) at 6 Veterans Affairs medical centers in the Midwest.

Results: TDT was usually addressed at an initial shared decision-making visit but often not with subsequent rounds of screening or nodule follow-up. No site was aware that any TDT-related outcomes were tracked within their program. While the LCS clinical reminders included some aspects of tobacco use (eg, tobacco pack-years), they did not support clinicians in offering TDT or capture outcomes and were perceived as "checkboxes to nowhere." This was contrasted with other clinical reminders linked to dashboards that provide rolling feedback for important clinical outcomes (eg, diabetes care). Interviewees reported competing demands and limited expertise in motivational interventions as additional barriers. A dedicated team for TDT and a "one-click referral" were perceived as key success factors.

Conclusions: TDT remains poorly integrated into LCS. Addressing identified barriers will require considerable investment in TDT resources and improvements to LCS tools to support the provision of cessation support.

将烟草依赖治疗纳入肺癌筛查的障碍:定性评估。
前言/目的:我们定性地评估了围绕将烟草依赖治疗(TDT)纳入肺癌筛查(LCS)的当前做法和感知障碍。方法:根据实用、稳健的实施和可持续性模型,我们对中西部6个退伍军人事务医疗中心的临床医生(n = 18)进行了半结构化访谈。结果:TDT通常在最初的共同决策访问中解决,但通常不在随后的轮次筛查或结节随访中解决。没有一个网站知道在他们的项目中跟踪了任何与tdt相关的结果。虽然LCS临床提醒包括烟草使用的某些方面(例如,烟草包年),但它们并不支持临床医生提供TDT或捕获结果,并且被认为是“无处可去的复选框”。这与其他与仪表板相连的临床提醒形成对比,后者为重要的临床结果(如糖尿病护理)提供滚动反馈。受访者报告说,在动机干预方面的竞争需求和有限的专业知识是额外的障碍。一个专门的TDT团队和“一键转诊”被认为是成功的关键因素。结论:TDT在LCS中的整合仍然很差。解决已确定的障碍将需要对TDT资源进行大量投资,并改进LCS工具,以支持提供戒烟支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
183
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信