Sayani Ambreen, Ali Muhanad Ahmed, Dey Pooja, Corrado Ann Marie, Ziegler Carolyn, Nicholson Erika, Lofters Aisha
Women's College Research Institute, Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
MAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
JTO Clin Res Rep. 2023 Feb 2;4(3):100469. doi: 10.1016/j.jtocrr.2023.100469. eCollection 2023 Mar.
Participation in lung cancer screening (LCS) is lower in populations with the highest burden of lung cancer risk (through the social patterning of smoking behavior) and lowest levels of health care utilization (through structurally inaccessible care) leading to a widening of health inequities.
We conducted a scoping review using the Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework to inform equitable access to LCS by illuminating knowledge and implementation gaps in interventions designed to increase the uptake of LCS. We comprehensively searched for LCS interventions (Ovid Medline, Excerpta Medica database, the Cochrane Library, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Scopus from 2000 to June 22, 2021) and included peer-reviewed articles and gray literature published in the English language that describe an intervention designed to increase the uptake of LCS, charted data using our previously published tool and conduced a health equity analysis to determine the intended-unintended and positive-negative outcomes of the interventions for populations experiencing the greatest inequities.
Our search yielded 3572 peer-reviewed articles and 54,292 pieces of gray literature. Ultimately, we included 35 peer-reviewed articles and one gray literature. The interventions occurred in the United States, United Kingdom, Japan, and Italy, focusing on shared decision-making, the use of electronic health records as reminders, patient navigation, community-based campaigns, and mobile computed tomography scanners. We developed an equity-oriented LCS framework and mapped the dimensions and outcomes of the interventions on access to LCS on the basis of approachability, acceptability, availability, affordability, and appropriateness of the intervention. No intervention was mapped across all five dimensions. Most notably, knowledge and implementation gaps were identified in dimensions of acceptability, availability, and affordability.
Interventions that were most effective in improving access to LCS targeted priority populations, raised community-level awareness, tailored materials for sociocultural acceptability, did not depend on prior patient engagement/registration with the health care system, proactively considered costs related to participation, and enhanced utilization through informed decision-making.
在肺癌风险负担最高(通过吸烟行为的社会模式)和医疗保健利用率最低(通过结构上难以获得的医疗服务)的人群中,参与肺癌筛查(LCS)的比例较低,这导致了健康不平等的加剧。
我们使用阿克斯和奥马利的方法框架进行了一项范围审查,通过揭示旨在提高LCS接受率的干预措施中的知识和实施差距,为公平获得LCS提供信息。我们全面搜索了LCS干预措施(Ovid Medline、医学文摘数据库、考科蓝图书馆、护理及相关健康文献累积索引和Scopus,时间跨度为2000年至2021年6月22日),并纳入了以英文发表的同行评审文章和灰色文献,这些文献描述了旨在提高LCS接受率的干预措施,使用我们之前发表的工具绘制数据,并进行了健康公平性分析,以确定干预措施对经历最大不平等的人群的预期和非预期以及积极和消极结果。
我们的搜索产生了3572篇同行评审文章和54292篇灰色文献。最终,我们纳入了35篇同行评审文章和1篇灰色文献。这些干预措施发生在美国、英国、日本和意大利,重点是共同决策、使用电子健康记录作为提醒、患者导航、社区宣传活动以及移动计算机断层扫描仪。我们开发了一个以公平为导向的LCS框架,并根据干预措施的可及性、可接受性、可用性、可承受性和适宜性,将干预措施在获得LCS方面的维度和结果进行了映射。没有一项干预措施涵盖所有五个维度。最值得注意的是,在可接受性、可用性和可承受性维度中发现了知识和实施差距。
在改善获得LCS的机会方面最有效的干预措施针对优先人群,提高社区层面的认识,针对社会文化可接受性量身定制材料,不依赖患者先前与医疗保健系统的参与/注册,积极考虑与参与相关的成本,并通过知情决策提高利用率。