Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening

CHEST pulmonary Pub Date : 2026-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-10-14 DOI:10.1016/j.chpulm.2025.100222
Adrienne Landsteiner PhD, MPH , Nicholas Zerzan MPH , Kristen E. Ullman MPH , Maylen Anthony MPH , Amy M. Claussen MLIS , Robertson Bayer MD, PhD , Tam Do MSH, RN, PHN , Allison M. Gustavson PT, DPT, PhD , Anne C. Melzer MD , Timothy J. Wilt MD, MPH
{"title":"Shared Decision-Making for Lung Cancer Screening","authors":"Adrienne Landsteiner PhD, MPH ,&nbsp;Nicholas Zerzan MPH ,&nbsp;Kristen E. Ullman MPH ,&nbsp;Maylen Anthony MPH ,&nbsp;Amy M. Claussen MLIS ,&nbsp;Robertson Bayer MD, PhD ,&nbsp;Tam Do MSH, RN, PHN ,&nbsp;Allison M. Gustavson PT, DPT, PhD ,&nbsp;Anne C. Melzer MD ,&nbsp;Timothy J. Wilt MD, MPH","doi":"10.1016/j.chpulm.2025.100222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Lung cancer screening (LCS) with annual low-dose CT scanning is recommended for eligible individuals. The Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services stipulates that counseling and shared decision-making (SDM) are a prerequisite for LCS reimbursement; however, SDM effects and optimal strategies are poorly understood.</div></div><div><h3>Research Question</h3><div>What are the effects of LCS SDM tools and strategies?</div></div><div><h3>Study Design and Methods</h3><div>This was a systematic review of US-based randomized controlled trials or observational studies of LCS SDM with a comparator. We searched Embase and MEDLINE via Ovid and CINAHL via EbscoHost for dates January 2010 through December 2023. We used dual abstraction and risk-of-bias (RoB) assessment with Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool for randomized controlled trials and Joanna Briggs Institute RoB for observational studies. Certainty of evidence (CoE) was based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Thirty-one studies were eligible. Studies varied in design, intervention, comparator, and methodology precluding quantitative analysis. Few reports provided adequate information to assess if they met Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services SDM criteria. We summarized findings by whether the tool was a health care provider- or patient-facing tool or material. Few studies addressed uptake, adherence, and harms. SDM, including by care coordinators or patient navigators, may increase LCS participation with acceptable information quality (low CoE) and does not increase decisional conflict/regret (high CoE). The choice of SDM tool may not affect LCS uptake (low CoE). Little evidence exists on whether effects vary by patient or clinic characteristics.</div></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><div>LCS SDM evidence is limited due to study variability and short follow-up. SDM may increase LCS participation, has acceptable information quality, and does not increase decisional conflict/regret. Most studies reported on knowledge; few addressed clinical and patient-centered outcomes. Specific SDM tool choice may not impact LCS. A decision aid may be superior to an education tool. Implementation should consider feasibility and that delivery included print, web, in-person, and video, with most patient-facing.</div></div><div><h3>Clinical Trial Registration</h3><div>International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; No.: CRD42024511257; URL: <span><span>https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/</span><svg><path></path></svg></span></div></div>","PeriodicalId":94286,"journal":{"name":"CHEST pulmonary","volume":"4 1","pages":"Article 100222"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CHEST pulmonary","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949789225000893","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Lung cancer screening (LCS) with annual low-dose CT scanning is recommended for eligible individuals. The Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services stipulates that counseling and shared decision-making (SDM) are a prerequisite for LCS reimbursement; however, SDM effects and optimal strategies are poorly understood.

Research Question

What are the effects of LCS SDM tools and strategies?

Study Design and Methods

This was a systematic review of US-based randomized controlled trials or observational studies of LCS SDM with a comparator. We searched Embase and MEDLINE via Ovid and CINAHL via EbscoHost for dates January 2010 through December 2023. We used dual abstraction and risk-of-bias (RoB) assessment with Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool for randomized controlled trials and Joanna Briggs Institute RoB for observational studies. Certainty of evidence (CoE) was based on Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

Results

Thirty-one studies were eligible. Studies varied in design, intervention, comparator, and methodology precluding quantitative analysis. Few reports provided adequate information to assess if they met Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services SDM criteria. We summarized findings by whether the tool was a health care provider- or patient-facing tool or material. Few studies addressed uptake, adherence, and harms. SDM, including by care coordinators or patient navigators, may increase LCS participation with acceptable information quality (low CoE) and does not increase decisional conflict/regret (high CoE). The choice of SDM tool may not affect LCS uptake (low CoE). Little evidence exists on whether effects vary by patient or clinic characteristics.

Interpretation

LCS SDM evidence is limited due to study variability and short follow-up. SDM may increase LCS participation, has acceptable information quality, and does not increase decisional conflict/regret. Most studies reported on knowledge; few addressed clinical and patient-centered outcomes. Specific SDM tool choice may not impact LCS. A decision aid may be superior to an education tool. Implementation should consider feasibility and that delivery included print, web, in-person, and video, with most patient-facing.

Clinical Trial Registration

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; No.: CRD42024511257; URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/
肺癌筛查的共同决策
推荐对符合条件的个体每年进行低剂量CT扫描的肺癌筛查(LCS)。医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心规定,咨询和共同决策(SDM)是LCS报销的先决条件;然而,SDM效应和最佳策略却知之甚少。LCS SDM工具和策略的效果是什么?研究设计和方法:本研究对美国随机对照试验或LCS SDM的观察性研究进行了系统综述。我们通过Ovid检索Embase和MEDLINE,通过EbscoHost检索CINAHL,检索日期为2010年1月至2023年12月。随机对照试验采用Cochrane RoB 2.0工具进行双抽象和风险偏倚(RoB)评估,观察性研究采用Joanna Briggs Institute RoB。证据的确定性(CoE)基于建议、评估、发展和评价的分级。结果31项研究符合条件。研究在设计、干预、比较物和排除定量分析的方法上各不相同。很少有报告提供足够的信息来评估他们是否符合医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心的SDM标准。我们通过该工具是面向医疗保健提供者还是面向患者的工具或材料来总结研究结果。很少有研究涉及摄取、依从性和危害。SDM,包括护理协调员或患者导航员,可能会增加LCS参与和可接受的信息质量(低CoE),不会增加决策冲突/后悔(高CoE)。SDM工具的选择可能不会影响LCS的吸收(低CoE)。几乎没有证据表明效果是否因患者或临床特征而异。lcs SDM的证据是有限的,由于研究的可变性和短随访。SDM可以增加LCS的参与,具有可接受的信息质量,并且不会增加决策冲突/后悔。大多数研究报告了知识;很少涉及临床和以患者为中心的结果。特定的SDM工具选择可能不会影响LCS。决策辅助工具可能优于教育工具。实施应考虑可行性,包括印刷、网络、面对面和视频,大多数面向患者。临床试验注册国际前瞻性系统评价注册;否。: CRD42024511257;URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书