Work

Opinions and Practices of Lung Cancer Screening by Physician Specialty

Year: 2019

Type: article

Abstract: **BACKGROUND** In response to the National Lung Screening Trial, numerous professional organizations published guidelines recommending annual lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for high-risk patients. Prior studies found that physician attitudes and knowledge about lung cancer screening directly impacts the number of screening exams ordered. **METHODS** In 2015, we surveyed 34 pulmonologists and 186 primary care providers (PCPs) to evaluate opinions and practices of lung cancer screening in a large academic medical center. We compared PCP and pulmonologist responses using t-tests and χ^2^ tests. **RESULTS** The overall survey response rate was 40% (39% for PCPs and 50% for pulmonologists). Pulmonologists were more likely than PCPs to report lung cancer screening as beneficial for patients (88.2% versus 37.7%, *P* \< .0001) and as being cost-effective (47.1% versus 14.3%, *P* = .02). More pulmonologists (76%) reported ordering a LDCT for screening in the past 12 months compared to PCPs (41%, *P* = .012). Pulmonologists and PCPs reported similar barriers to referring patients for lung cancer screening, including patient costs (82.4% versus 77.8%), potential for emotional harm (58.8% versus 58.3%), high false positive rate (47.1% versus 69.4%), and likelihood for medical complications (47.1% versus 59.7%). **LIMITATIONS** Our results are generalizable to academic medical centers and responses may be susceptible to recall bias, non-response bias, and social desirability bias. **CONCLUSION** We found significant differences in opinions and practices between PCPs and pulmonologists regarding lung cancer screening referrals and perceived benefits. As lung cancer screening continues to emerge in clinical practice, it is important to understand these differences across provider specialty to ensure screening is implemented and offered to patients appropriately.

Source: North Carolina Medical Journal

DOI: 10.18043/ncm.80.1.19