Using United States Preventive Services Task Force Guidelines to Improve a Family Medicine Clinic’s Lung Cancer Screening Rates: A Quality Improvement Project

Azubuike, Uwa Comfort; Cooper, Denise; Aplin-Snider, Christina

doi:10.1016/j.nurpra.2020.07.001

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“… 2, 1.7% [ 69 , 101 ] 36, 30.5% [ 42 , 46 , 50 , 51 , 53 , 55 , 56 , 58 , 60 , 62 , 66 , 67 , 70 , 72 , 78 , 80 , 91 , 92 , 94 , 96 , 116 , 118 , 119 , 123 , 125 , 130 , 132 , 137 , 139 , 143 , 150 – 153 , 155 , 157 ] 38, 32.2% Present guideline materials at meetings 4, 3.4% [ 76 , 81 , 101 , 126 ] 33, 28% [ 42 , 46 , 56 , 58 , 61 , 65 , 67 , 68 , 72 , 74 , 78 , 84 , …”

Section: Resultsunclassified

“…[ 42 , 46 , 49 , 52 , 55 , 56 , 58 , 61 , 62 , 65 , 67 , 71 , 72 , 78 , 80 , 84 , 86 , 91 , 93 , 96 – 100 , 103 , 107 , 112 , 114 , 118 – 120 , 123 , 128 – 131 , 133 , 134 , 137 , 141 , 143 , 150 – 152 , 155 , 157 ]…”

Section: Resultsunclassified

“…[ 42 , 46 , 50 , 51 , 53 , 55 , 56 , 58 , 60 , 62 , 66 , 67 , 70 , 72 , 78 , 80 , 91 , 92 , 94 , 96 , 116 , 118 , 119 , 123 , 125 , 130 , 132 , 137 , 139 , 143 , 150 – 153 , 155 , 157 ]…”

Section: Resultsunclassified

“…[ 45 , 46 , 50 , 51 , 57 , 65 , 78 , 85 , 98 , 99 , 105 , 106 , 108 , 111 , 119 , 128 , 132 , 143 , 159 ]…”

Section: Resultsunclassified

See 3 more Smart Citations

Trends in guideline implementation: an updated scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Guidelines aim to support evidence-informed practice but are inconsistently used without implementation strategies. Our prior scoping review revealed that guideline implementation interventions were not selected and tailored based on processes known to enhance guideline uptake and impact. The purpose of this study was to update the prior scoping review. Methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for studies published from 2014 to January 2021 that evaluated guideline implementation interventions. We screened studies in triplicate and extracted data in duplicate. We reported study and intervention characteristics and studies that achieved impact with summary statistics. Results We included 118 studies that implemented guidelines on 16 clinical topics. With regard to implementation planning, 21% of studies referred to theories or frameworks, 50% pre-identified implementation barriers, and 36% engaged stakeholders in selecting or tailoring interventions. Studies that employed frameworks (n=25) most often used the theoretical domains framework (28%) or social cognitive theory (28%). Those that pre-identified barriers (n=59) most often consulted literature (60%). Those that engaged stakeholders (n=42) most often consulted healthcare professionals (79%). Common interventions included educating professionals about guidelines (44%) and information systems/technology (41%). Most studies employed multi-faceted interventions (75%). A total of 97 (82%) studies achieved impact (improvements in one or more reported outcomes) including 10 (40% of 25) studies that employed frameworks, 28 (47.45% of 59) studies that pre-identified barriers, 22 (52.38% of 42) studies that engaged stakeholders, and 21 (70% of 30) studies that employed single interventions. Conclusions Compared to our prior review, this review found that more studies used processes to select and tailor interventions, and a wider array of types of interventions across the Mazza taxonomy. Given that most studies achieved impact, this might reinforce the need for implementation planning. However, even studies that did not plan implementation achieved impact. Similarly, even single interventions achieved impact. Thus, a future systematic review based on this data is warranted to establish if the use of frameworks, barrier identification, stakeholder engagement, and multi-faceted interventions are associated with impact. Trial registration The protocol was registered with Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/4nxpr) and published in JBI Evidence Synthesis.

show abstract

Section: Resultsunclassified

“…[ 42 , 46 , 50 , 51 , 53 , 55 , 56 , 58 , 60 , 62 , 66 , 67 , 70 , 72 , 78 , 80 , 91 , 92 , 94 , 96 , 116 , 118 , 119 , 123 , 125 , 130 , 132 , 137 , 139 , 143 , 150 – 153 , 155 , 157 ]…”

Section: Resultsunclassified

“…[ 45 , 46 , 50 , 51 , 57 , 65 , 78 , 85 , 98 , 99 , 105 , 106 , 108 , 111 , 119 , 128 , 132 , 143 , 159 ]…”

Section: Resultsunclassified

See 2 more Smart Citations

Trends in guideline implementation: an updated scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Optimal Pathways to Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care Settings: A Scoping Review

Symvoulakis,

Bouloukaki,

Christodoulakis

et al. 2024

Current Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide, and delayed detection contributes to poor outcomes. Primary care plays a crucial role in early diagnosis, but detecting lung cancer early remains challenging for general practitioners (GPs). Therefore, the aim of this scoping review was to identify optimal strategies and pathways for lung cancer screening (LCS) in primary care settings globally. We conducted a scoping review by searching PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies published in the past 10 years. Our keywords included “lung cancer”, “primary care”, “early detection”, “screening”, “best practices”, and “pathways”. We included randomized controlled trials, cross-sectional studies, and cohort studies focused on lung cancer screening in primary care. We extracted data on study characteristics, screening pathways, and key findings. We identified 18 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Important strategies for LCS included the use of shared decision-making tools, electronic health record (HER) prompts, risk prediction models, community outreach, and integration with smoking cessation programs. Barriers to implementation included the lack of provider familiarity with guidelines, time constraints, and patient factors. Healthcare professionals and policy makers in primary care settings can leverage this information to integrate the most effective screening strategies into their care, thus enhancing early detection rates and subsequently reducing global lung cancer morbidity and mortality.

show abstract

Using United States Preventive Services Task Force Guidelines to Improve a Family Medicine Clinic’s Lung Cancer Screening Rates: A Quality Improvement Project

Cited by 2 publications

References 6 publications

Trends in guideline implementation: an updated scoping review

Trends in guideline implementation: an updated scoping review

Optimal Pathways to Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care Settings: A Scoping Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About