Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 2/2020

01-02-2020 | Lung Cancer

What Exactly Is Shared Decision-Making? A Qualitative Study of Shared Decision-Making in Lung Cancer Screening

Authors: Anne C Melzer, MD MS, Sara E. Golden, MPH, Sarah S. Ono, PhD, Santanu Datta, PhD, MBA, Kristina Crothers, MD, Christopher G. Slatore, MD, MS

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 2/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) is widely recommended and required by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid for patients considering lung cancer screening (LCS).

Objective

We examined clinicians’ communication practices and perceived barriers of SDM for LCS at three medical centers with established screening programs.

Design

Multicenter qualitative study of clinicians participating in LCS.

Approach

We performed semi-structured interviews, which were transcribed and analyzed using directed content analysis, guided by a theoretical model of patient-clinician communication.

Participants

We interviewed 24 clinicians including LCS coordinators (2), pulmonologists (3), and primary care providers (17), 4 of whom worked for the LCS program, a thoracic surgeon, and a radiologist.

Results

All clinicians agreed with the goal of SDM, to ensure the screening decision was congruent with the patient’s values. The depth and type of information presented by each clinician role varied considerably. LCS coordinators presented detailed information including numeric estimates of benefit and harm. Most PCPs explained the process more generally, focusing on logistics and the high rate of nodule detection. No clinician explicitly elicited values or communication preferences. Many PCPs tailored the conversation based on their implicit understanding of patients’ values and preferences, gained from past experiences. PCPs reported that time, lack of detailed personal knowledge of LCS, and patient preferences were barriers to SDM. Many clinicians perceived that a significant proportion of patients were not interested in specific percentages and preferred to receive a clinician recommendation.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that clinicians support the goal of SDM for LCS decisions but PCPs may not perform some of its elements. The lack of completion of some elements, such as PCPs’ lack of in-depth information exchange, may reflect perceived patient preferences for communication. As LCS is implemented, further research is needed to support a personalized, patient-centered approach to produce better outcomes.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Moyer VA. Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:330-338.PubMed Moyer VA. Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160:330-338.PubMed
2.
go back to reference Mazzone P, Powell CA, Arenberg D, et al. Components necessary for high-quality lung cancer screening: American college of chest physicians and american thoracic society policy statement. Chest. 2015;147:295-303.PubMed Mazzone P, Powell CA, Arenberg D, et al. Components necessary for high-quality lung cancer screening: American college of chest physicians and american thoracic society policy statement. Chest. 2015;147:295-303.PubMed
3.
go back to reference Miranda LS, Datta S, Melzer AC, et al. Rationale and Design of the Lung Cancer Screening Implementation. Evaluation of Patient-Centered Care Study. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017;14:1581-1590.PubMed Miranda LS, Datta S, Melzer AC, et al. Rationale and Design of the Lung Cancer Screening Implementation. Evaluation of Patient-Centered Care Study. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017;14:1581-1590.PubMed
4.
go back to reference Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:395-409.PubMed Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:395-409.PubMed
5.
go back to reference Wood DE. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines for Lung Cancer Screening. Thoracic Surgery Clinics. 25:185-197.PubMed Wood DE. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines for Lung Cancer Screening. Thoracic Surgery Clinics. 25:185-197.PubMed
6.
go back to reference Harris RP, Sheridan SL, Lewis CL, et al. The harms of screening: A proposed taxonomy and application to lung cancer screening. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:281-286.PubMed Harris RP, Sheridan SL, Lewis CL, et al. The harms of screening: A proposed taxonomy and application to lung cancer screening. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174:281-286.PubMed
7.
go back to reference Slatore CG, Sullivan DR, Pappas M, Humphrey LL. Patient-Centered Outcomes among Lung Cancer Screening Recipients with Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review. J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9:927-934.PubMed Slatore CG, Sullivan DR, Pappas M, Humphrey LL. Patient-Centered Outcomes among Lung Cancer Screening Recipients with Computed Tomography: A Systematic Review. J Thorac Oncol. 2014;9:927-934.PubMed
9.
go back to reference Sheridan SL, Harris RP, Woolf SH, Force SD. Shared decision making about screening and chemoprevention: a suggested approach from the US Preventive Services Task Force. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26:56-66.PubMed Sheridan SL, Harris RP, Woolf SH, Force SD. Shared decision making about screening and chemoprevention: a suggested approach from the US Preventive Services Task Force. Am J Prev Med. 2004;26:56-66.PubMed
10.
go back to reference Laine C, Davidoff F. Patient-centered medicine. A professional evolution. JAMA. 1996;275(2):152-156.PubMed Laine C, Davidoff F. Patient-centered medicine. A professional evolution. JAMA. 1996;275(2):152-156.PubMed
11.
go back to reference Mead N, Bower P. Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Soc Sci Med (1982). 2000;51:1087-1110. Mead N, Bower P. Patient-centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Soc Sci Med (1982). 2000;51:1087-1110.
12.
go back to reference Elwyn G, Cochran N, Pignone M. Shared decision making—the importance of diagnosing preferences. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;17:1239-1240. Elwyn G, Cochran N, Pignone M. Shared decision making—the importance of diagnosing preferences. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;17:1239-1240.
13.
go back to reference Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, et al. Shared Decision Making: A Model for Clinical Practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27:1361-1367.PubMedPubMedCentral Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, et al. Shared Decision Making: A Model for Clinical Practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27:1361-1367.PubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Kanodra NM, Pope C, Halbert CH, Silvestri GA, Rice LJ, Tanner NT. Primary Care Provider and Patient Perspectives on Lung Cancer Screening. A Qualitative Study. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016;13:1977-1982.PubMed Kanodra NM, Pope C, Halbert CH, Silvestri GA, Rice LJ, Tanner NT. Primary Care Provider and Patient Perspectives on Lung Cancer Screening. A Qualitative Study. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016;13:1977-1982.PubMed
15.
go back to reference Triplette M, Kross EK, Mann BA, et al. An Assessment of Primary Care and Pulmonary Provider Perspectives on Lung Cancer Screening. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2018;15:69-75.PubMedPubMedCentral Triplette M, Kross EK, Mann BA, et al. An Assessment of Primary Care and Pulmonary Provider Perspectives on Lung Cancer Screening. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2018;15:69-75.PubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Brenner AT, Malo TL, Margolis M, et al. Evaluating Shared Decision Making for Lung Cancer Screening. JAMA Intern Med. 2018,178:1311-1316PubMedPubMedCentral Brenner AT, Malo TL, Margolis M, et al. Evaluating Shared Decision Making for Lung Cancer Screening. JAMA Intern Med. 2018,178:1311-1316PubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Ersek JL, Eberth JM, McDonnell KK, et al. Knowledge of, attitudes toward, and use of low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening among family physicians. Cancer. 2016 Ersek JL, Eberth JM, McDonnell KK, et al. Knowledge of, attitudes toward, and use of low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening among family physicians. Cancer. 2016
18.
go back to reference Sandelowski M. Sample size in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health. 1995;18(2):179-183.PubMed Sandelowski M. Sample size in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health. 1995;18(2):179-183.PubMed
19.
go back to reference Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15:1277-1288.PubMed Hsieh HF, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15:1277-1288.PubMed
20.
go back to reference Callon W, Beach MC, Links AR, Wasserman C, Boss EF. An expanded framework to define and measure shared decision-making in dialogue: A ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ approach. Patient Educ Couns. 2018;101:1368-1377.PubMedPubMedCentral Callon W, Beach MC, Links AR, Wasserman C, Boss EF. An expanded framework to define and measure shared decision-making in dialogue: A ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ approach. Patient Educ Couns. 2018;101:1368-1377.PubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Elkin EB, Kim SH, Casper ES, Kissane DW, Schrag D. Desire for information and involvement in treatment decisions: elderly cancer patients’ preferences and their physicians’ perceptions. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5275-5280.PubMed Elkin EB, Kim SH, Casper ES, Kissane DW, Schrag D. Desire for information and involvement in treatment decisions: elderly cancer patients’ preferences and their physicians’ perceptions. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5275-5280.PubMed
22.
go back to reference Bruera E, Willey JS, Lynn Palmer J, Rosales M. Treatment decisions for breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2002;94:2076-2080.PubMed Bruera E, Willey JS, Lynn Palmer J, Rosales M. Treatment decisions for breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2002;94:2076-2080.PubMed
23.
24.
go back to reference Caverly TJ, Hayward RA, Burke JF. Much to do with nothing: microsimulation study on time management in primary care. BMJ. 2018,363:k4983.PubMedPubMedCentral Caverly TJ, Hayward RA, Burke JF. Much to do with nothing: microsimulation study on time management in primary care. BMJ. 2018,363:k4983.PubMedPubMedCentral
25.
go back to reference Carter-Harris L, Gould MK. Multilevel Barriers to the Successful Implementation of Lung Cancer Screening: Why Does It Have to Be So Hard? Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017;14:1261-1265.PubMed Carter-Harris L, Gould MK. Multilevel Barriers to the Successful Implementation of Lung Cancer Screening: Why Does It Have to Be So Hard? Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017;14:1261-1265.PubMed
26.
go back to reference Huo J, Shen C, Volk RJ, Shih Y-CT. Use of CT and Chest Radiography for Lung Cancer Screening Before and After Publication of Screening Guidelines: Intended and Unintended Uptake. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:439-441.PubMedPubMedCentral Huo J, Shen C, Volk RJ, Shih Y-CT. Use of CT and Chest Radiography for Lung Cancer Screening Before and After Publication of Screening Guidelines: Intended and Unintended Uptake. JAMA Intern Med. 2017;177:439-441.PubMedPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference Henderson LM, Jones LM, Marsh MW, Benefield T, Rivera MP, Molina PL. Lung Cancer Screening Practices in North Carolina CT Facilities. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14:166-170.PubMed Henderson LM, Jones LM, Marsh MW, Benefield T, Rivera MP, Molina PL. Lung Cancer Screening Practices in North Carolina CT Facilities. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14:166-170.PubMed
28.
go back to reference Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Social Sci Med (1982). 1997;44:681-692. Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T. Shared decision-making in the medical encounter: what does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Social Sci Med (1982). 1997;44:681-692.
29.
go back to reference Murray E, Charles C, Gafni A. Shared decision-making in primary care: tailoring the Charles et al. model to fit the context of general practice. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;62:205-211.PubMed Murray E, Charles C, Gafni A. Shared decision-making in primary care: tailoring the Charles et al. model to fit the context of general practice. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;62:205-211.PubMed
30.
go back to reference Deber RB, Kraetschmer N, Urowitz S, Sharpe N. Do people want to be autonomous patients? Preferred roles in treatment decision-making in several patient populations. Health Expect. 2007;10:248-258.PubMedPubMedCentral Deber RB, Kraetschmer N, Urowitz S, Sharpe N. Do people want to be autonomous patients? Preferred roles in treatment decision-making in several patient populations. Health Expect. 2007;10:248-258.PubMedPubMedCentral
31.
go back to reference Kraetschmer N, Sharpe N, Urowitz S, Deber RB. How does trust affect patient preferences for participation in decision-making? Health Expect. 2004;7:317-326.PubMedPubMedCentral Kraetschmer N, Sharpe N, Urowitz S, Deber RB. How does trust affect patient preferences for participation in decision-making? Health Expect. 2004;7:317-326.PubMedPubMedCentral
32.
go back to reference Levinson W, Kao A, Kuby A, Thisted RA. Not all patients want to participate in decision making. A national study of public preferences. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20:531-535.PubMedPubMedCentral Levinson W, Kao A, Kuby A, Thisted RA. Not all patients want to participate in decision making. A national study of public preferences. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20:531-535.PubMedPubMedCentral
33.
go back to reference Crothers K, Kross E, Reisch LM, et al. Patients’ Attitudes Regarding Lung Cancer Screening and Decision Aids: A Survey and Focus Group Study. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016;13:1992-2001PubMedPubMedCentral Crothers K, Kross E, Reisch LM, et al. Patients’ Attitudes Regarding Lung Cancer Screening and Decision Aids: A Survey and Focus Group Study. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2016;13:1992-2001PubMedPubMedCentral
34.
go back to reference Wiener RS, Koppelman E, Bolton R, et al. Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Shared Decision-making in Early Adopting Lung Cancer Screening Programs: a Qualitative Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2018;33:1035-1042.PubMedPubMedCentral Wiener RS, Koppelman E, Bolton R, et al. Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Shared Decision-making in Early Adopting Lung Cancer Screening Programs: a Qualitative Study. J Gen Intern Med. 2018;33:1035-1042.PubMedPubMedCentral
35.
go back to reference Legare F, Witteman HO. Shared decision making: examining key elements and barriers to adoption into routine clinical practice. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32:276-284.PubMed Legare F, Witteman HO. Shared decision making: examining key elements and barriers to adoption into routine clinical practice. Health Aff (Millwood). 2013;32:276-284.PubMed
36.
go back to reference Friedberg MW, Van Busum K, Wexler R, Bowen M, Schneider EC. A Demonstration Of Shared Decision Making In Primary Care Highlights Barriers To Adoption And Potential Remedies. Health Affairs. 2013;32:268-275.PubMed Friedberg MW, Van Busum K, Wexler R, Bowen M, Schneider EC. A Demonstration Of Shared Decision Making In Primary Care Highlights Barriers To Adoption And Potential Remedies. Health Affairs. 2013;32:268-275.PubMed
37.
go back to reference Golden SE, Wiener RS, Sullivan D, Ganzini L, Slatore CG. Primary Care Providers and a System Problem: A Qualitative Study of Clinicians Caring for Patients With Incidental Pulmonary Nodules. Chest. 2015;148:1422-1429.PubMedPubMedCentral Golden SE, Wiener RS, Sullivan D, Ganzini L, Slatore CG. Primary Care Providers and a System Problem: A Qualitative Study of Clinicians Caring for Patients With Incidental Pulmonary Nodules. Chest. 2015;148:1422-1429.PubMedPubMedCentral
38.
go back to reference Iaccarino JM, Simmons J, Gould MK, et al. Clinical Equipoise and Shared Decision-making in Pulmonary Nodule Management. A Survey of American Thoracic Society Clinicians. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017;14:968-975.PubMedPubMedCentral Iaccarino JM, Simmons J, Gould MK, et al. Clinical Equipoise and Shared Decision-making in Pulmonary Nodule Management. A Survey of American Thoracic Society Clinicians. Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2017;14:968-975.PubMedPubMedCentral
39.
go back to reference Rocque G, Miller-Sonnet E, Balch A, et al. Engaging Multidisciplinary Stakeholders to Drive Shared Decision-Making in Oncology. J Palliat Care. 2019;34:29-31.PubMed Rocque G, Miller-Sonnet E, Balch A, et al. Engaging Multidisciplinary Stakeholders to Drive Shared Decision-Making in Oncology. J Palliat Care. 2019;34:29-31.PubMed
40.
go back to reference Zeuner R, Frosch DL, Kuzemchak MD, Politi MC. Physicians’ perceptions of shared decision-making behaviours: a qualitative study demonstrating the continued chasm between aspirations and clinical practice. Health Expect. 2015;18:2465-2476.PubMed Zeuner R, Frosch DL, Kuzemchak MD, Politi MC. Physicians’ perceptions of shared decision-making behaviours: a qualitative study demonstrating the continued chasm between aspirations and clinical practice. Health Expect. 2015;18:2465-2476.PubMed
41.
go back to reference Golden SE, Thomas CR, Jr., Moghanaki D, Slatore CG. Dumping the information bucket: A qualitative study of clinicians caring for patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer. Patient Educ Couns. 2017;100:861-870.PubMed Golden SE, Thomas CR, Jr., Moghanaki D, Slatore CG. Dumping the information bucket: A qualitative study of clinicians caring for patients with early stage non-small cell lung cancer. Patient Educ Couns. 2017;100:861-870.PubMed
42.
go back to reference Lillie SE, Partin MR, Rice K, et al. VA Evidence-based Synthesis Program Reports. The Effects of Shared Decision Making on Cancer Screening - A Systematic Review. Washington (DC): Department of Veterans Affairs (US); 2014. Lillie SE, Partin MR, Rice K, et al. VA Evidence-based Synthesis Program Reports. The Effects of Shared Decision Making on Cancer Screening - A Systematic Review. Washington (DC): Department of Veterans Affairs (US); 2014.
43.
go back to reference Vogel BA, Leonhart R, Helmes AW. Communication matters: the impact of communication and participation in decision making on breast cancer patients’ depression and quality of life. Patient Educ Couns.. 2009;77:391-397.PubMed Vogel BA, Leonhart R, Helmes AW. Communication matters: the impact of communication and participation in decision making on breast cancer patients’ depression and quality of life. Patient Educ Couns.. 2009;77:391-397.PubMed
44.
go back to reference Mazzone PJ, Tenenbaum A, Seeley M, et al. Impact of a Lung Cancer Screening Counseling and Shared Decision-Making Visit. Chest. 2017;151:572-578.PubMed Mazzone PJ, Tenenbaum A, Seeley M, et al. Impact of a Lung Cancer Screening Counseling and Shared Decision-Making Visit. Chest. 2017;151:572-578.PubMed
Metadata
Title
What Exactly Is Shared Decision-Making? A Qualitative Study of Shared Decision-Making in Lung Cancer Screening
Authors
Anne C Melzer, MD MS
Sara E. Golden, MPH
Sarah S. Ono, PhD
Santanu Datta, PhD, MBA
Kristina Crothers, MD
Christopher G. Slatore, MD, MS
Publication date
01-02-2020
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 2/2020
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-05516-3

Other articles of this Issue 2/2020

Journal of General Internal Medicine 2/2020 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.