Communication & Screening Intervention for Lung Cancer

Overseen By Randi M Williams, PhD

Age: 18+

Sex: Any

Trial Phase: Academic

Sponsor: Georgetown University

Disqualifiers: Lung cancer history

No Placebo Group All trial participants will receive the active study treatment (no placebo)

Compensation: Varies

Number of Visits: 1

368 Participants Needed

Trial Summary

What is the purpose of this trial?

To test the impact of a multilevel intervention on primary (provider-patient communication, intentions, and knowledge) and secondary (screening referrals and completion) outcomes.

Will I have to stop taking my current medications?

The trial information does not specify whether you need to stop taking your current medications.

What data supports the effectiveness of the treatment Provider Prompt & Patient Outreach and Education for lung cancer?

Research shows that good communication between doctors and lung cancer patients improves patient satisfaction and understanding of their condition. Additionally, providing patients with more information can enhance their quality of life and satisfaction with care. ^{1 2 3 4 5}

How does this lung cancer screening intervention differ from other treatments?

This lung cancer screening intervention is unique because it focuses on improving communication and education about screening, using both print and web-based materials to engage participants and increase awareness. It also adapts to different delivery modes, such as in-person and phone sessions, to effectively reach diverse populations and improve screening adherence. ^{2 6 7 8 9}

Eligibility Criteria

This trial is for English-speaking individuals aged 50-80 who currently smoke or quit within the last 15 years, have a history of heavy smoking (20+ pack-years), and haven't had lung screening in over 13 months. They must be scheduled for an upcoming clinic appointment and able to consent and complete interviews. Those with a history of lung cancer cannot participate.

Inclusion Criteria

You have smoked the equivalent of one pack of cigarettes every day for at least 20 years.

I have a clinic appointment scheduled within the next 4 to 8 weeks.

Able and willing to provide meaningful consent and complete telephone interviews

Exclusion Criteria

I have a history of lung cancer.

Timeline

Screening

Participants are screened for eligibility to participate in the trial

2-4 weeks

Intervention

Participants and providers engage in a multilevel intervention to address health disparities in lung cancer screening

6 months

Regular visits as per clinic schedule

Follow-up

Participants are monitored for lung cancer screening knowledge, intentions, and completion rates

6 months

1 visit (in-person) at 1-week post-visit, ongoing monitoring

Treatment Details

Interventions

• Provider Prompt & Patient Outreach and Education

Trial Overview The study is examining the effectiveness of two strategies: 'Provider Prompt' which reminds healthcare providers to discuss lung cancer screening, and 'Patient Outreach & Education' aimed at increasing patient knowledge about screening benefits.

Participant Groups

Group I: Multilevel Intervention Experimental Treatment 1 Intervention

Group II: Nonequivalent Control Group Active Control 1 Intervention

Who Is Running the Clinical Trial?

Georgetown University

Lead Sponsor

Trials

355

Recruited

142,000+

Findings from Research

A study involving 276 lung cancer patients revealed that many reported inadequate communication with their physicians on critical topics, such as emotional symptoms (56% reported low communication) and living will preparation (90% reported low communication).

Inadequate communication was consistent across different patient demographics, but Hispanic patients were less likely to report poor communication compared to non-Hispanic whites and blacks, indicating a potential area for improvement in patient care.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Patients rate physician communication about lung cancer. Nelson, JE., Gay, EB., Berman, AR., et al.[2022]

A study of 101 newly diagnosed lung cancer patients revealed that while most patients (86%) understood their diagnosis and 81% recalled their treatment procedure, only 42% were aware of whether their treatment goal was curative or palliative.

Patient satisfaction with communication was high for diagnosis (83%) and treatment procedure (77%), but significantly lower for treatment goals (53%), indicating a need for improved communication strategies, especially regarding treatment objectives.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Physician communication in a lung cancer center--does the message come across? Nehls, W., Gabrijel, S., Kiss, A., et al.[2015]

In a study of 200 lung cancer patients, those who received multimodal health education combined with a feedback method experienced significantly shorter postoperative extubation times and quicker recovery to leaving the bed compared to those who received conventional education.

Patients in the observation group also reported higher exercise compliance and greater satisfaction with their care, indicating that this educational approach can enhance recovery and improve psychological well-being after surgery.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Effect of Multimodal Health Education Combined with the Feedback Method in Perioperative Patients with Lung Cancer: A Randomised Controlled Study. Yuan, Z., Gao, L., Zheng, M., et al.[2023]

The Cancer Care Summary was developed to enhance communication about lung cancer patients' diagnoses and treatments, ensuring that critical information is shared with healthcare providers across various settings.

So far, 102 patient Summaries have been generated, which are automatically integrated into the electronic health record and made accessible to both providers and patients, demonstrating a sustainable approach to improving cancer care communication.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Development of a Cancer Care Summary Through the Electronic Health Record. Carr, LL., Zelarney, P., Meadows, S., et al.[2016]

In a study of 102 non-small cell lung cancer patients, those who received both oral and written information reported lower satisfaction levels regarding their care, despite having similar quality of life scores compared to those who received only oral information.

The findings suggest that providing additional written information may not enhance patient satisfaction and could even lead to dissatisfaction, indicating a need for further research on how best to inform patients about their condition and treatment.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Impact of information on quality of life and satisfaction of non-small cell lung cancer patients: a randomized study of standardized versus individualized information before thoracic surgery. Barlési, F., Barrau, K., Loundou, A., et al.[2015]

Tobacco Treatment Specialists (TTSs) currently lack sufficient knowledge about lung cancer screening (LCS) guidelines, which limits their ability to promote screening among patients, despite recognizing its importance.

There is a significant opportunity to enhance LCS awareness through TTSs, who are willing to incorporate LCS education into their practices, indicating a need for targeted training to improve their effectiveness in this area.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Tobacco treatment specialists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about lung cancer screening: Potential piece of the puzzle for increasing lung cancer screening awareness. Carter-Bawa, L., Kotsen, C., Schofield, E., et al.[2023]

A randomized trial involving 298 Maryland Tobacco Quitline callers showed that providing lung cancer screening (LCS) education through print materials led to higher engagement (75% read the materials) compared to web-based materials (61.6%).

Despite similar rates of scheduling or completing LCS between the two groups (around 43%), the study highlights that offering educational materials in preferred formats (print or web) can enhance awareness and potentially increase screening rates among eligible individuals.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The tobacco quitline setting as a teachable moment: The Educating Quitline Users About Lung (EQUAL) cancer screening randomized trial. Webster, M., Whealan, J., Williams, RM., et al.[2023]

The Lung AIR intervention effectively increased knowledge and reduced fear about lung cancer screening among 292 participants, demonstrating its feasibility as a community-based educational program.

One-on-one phone sessions were particularly effective, leading to greater increases in participants' intention to complete screening compared to in-person group sessions, especially among those with lower income and higher smoking rates.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Adapting Community Educational Programs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparing the Feasibility and Efficacy of a Lung Cancer Screening Educational Intervention by Mode of Delivery. Bouchard, EG., Saad-Harfouche, FG., Clark, N., et al.[2023]

A study involving 49 patients and 36 clinicians revealed a significant gap in perceptions of communication quality after lung cancer screening, with many patients feeling confused and dissatisfied when results were communicated via letter, even for low-risk findings.

Patients who received their results through direct conversations reported higher satisfaction and reduced distress, highlighting the importance of personalized communication in addressing patient concerns and understanding of their screening results.

NCBI (Pubmed)

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Patient vs Clinician Perspectives on Communication About Results of Lung Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study. Wiener, RS., Clark, JA., Koppelman, E., et al.[2023]

References

1. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Patients rate physician communication about lung cancer. [2022]

2. Germany pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Physician communication in a lung cancer center--does the message come across? [2015]

3. New Zealand pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Effect of Multimodal Health Education Combined with the Feedback Method in Perioperative Patients with Lung Cancer: A Randomised Controlled Study. [2023]

4. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Development of a Cancer Care Summary Through the Electronic Health Record. [2016]

5. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Impact of information on quality of life and satisfaction of non-small cell lung cancer patients: a randomized study of standardized versus individualized information before thoracic surgery. [2015]

6. Ireland pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Tobacco treatment specialists' knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about lung cancer screening: Potential piece of the puzzle for increasing lung cancer screening awareness. [2023]

7. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

The tobacco quitline setting as a teachable moment: The Educating Quitline Users About Lung (EQUAL) cancer screening randomized trial. [2023]

8. England pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Adapting Community Educational Programs During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparing the Feasibility and Efficacy of a Lung Cancer Screening Educational Intervention by Mode of Delivery. [2023]

9. United States pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Patient vs Clinician Perspectives on Communication About Results of Lung Cancer Screening: A Qualitative Study. [2023]