Abstract:Background Lung cancer risk and life expectancy vary substantially across patients eligible for low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening (LCS), which has important consequences for optimizing LCS decisions for different patients. To account for this heterogeneity during decision-making, web-based decision support tools are needed to enable quick calculations and streamline the process of obtaining individualized information that more accurately informs patient-clinician LCS discussions. We created DecisionPrecision, a clinician-facing web-based decision support tool, to help tailor the LCS discussion to a patient’s individualized lung cancer risk and estimated net benefit. Objective The objective of our study is to test two strategies for implementing DecisionPrecision in primary care at eight Veterans Affairs medical centers: a quality improvement (QI) training approach and academic detailing (AD). Methods Phase 1 comprised a multisite, cluster randomized trial comparing the effectiveness of standard implementation (adding a link to DecisionPrecision in the electronic health record vs standard implementation plus the Learn, Engage, Act, and Process [LEAP] QI training program). The primary outcome measure was the use of DecisionPrecision at each site before versus after LEAP QI training. The second phase of the study examined the potential effectiveness of AD as an implementation strategy for DecisionPrecision at all 8 medical centers. Outcomes were assessed by comparing absolute tool use before and after AD visits and conducting semistructured interviews with a subset of primary care physicians (PCPs) following the AD visits. Results Phase 1 findings showed that sites that participated in the LEAP QI training program used DecisionPrecision significantly more often than the standard implementation sites (tool used 190.3, SD 174.8 times on average over 6 months at LEAP sites vs 3.5 SD 3.7 at standard sites; P<.001). However, this finding was confounded by the lack of screening coordinators at standard implementation sites. In phase 2, there was no difference in the 6-month tool use between before and after AD (95% CI −5.06 to 6.40; P=.82). Follow-up interviews with PCPs indicated that the AD strategy increased provider awareness and appreciation for the benefits of the tool. However, other priorities and limited time prevented PCPs from using them during routine clinical visits. Conclusions The phase 1 findings did not provide conclusive evidence of the benefit of a QI training approach for implementing a decision support tool for LCS among PCPs. In addition, phase 2 findings showed that our light-touch, single-visit AD strategy did not increase tool use. To enable tool use by PCPs, prediction-based tools must be fully automated and integrated into electronic health records, thereby helping providers personalize LCS discussions among their many competing demands. PCPs also need more time to engage in shared decision-making discussions with their patients. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02765412; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02765412

Pursuing Relational Consciousness: Thinking and Antithinking in Group

Development and Usability Testing of a Computer-Tailored Decision Support Tool for Lung Cancer Screening: Study Protocol

Computer-Tailored Decision Support Tool for Lung Cancer Screening: Community-Based Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)

Sunbed Use, Attitudes, and Knowledge After the Under-18s Ban

Computer-Tailored Decision Support Tool for Lung Cancer Screening: Community-Based Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

A pre-post study testing a lung cancer screening decision aid in primary care

Patients' Attitudes Regarding Lung Cancer Screening and Decision Aids. A Survey and Focus Group Study

Preliminary Testing of A Web-Based Lung Cancer Screening Decision Coaching Tool for Older Chinese American Smokers and Their Providers

Implementation of a Web-Based Tool for Shared Decision-making in Lung Cancer Screening: Mixed Methods Quality Improvement Evaluation

Development and Preliminary Testing of a Decision aid to Support Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors Considering Lung Cancer Screening

Use of Erythropoietin for Cardiovascular Protection

Tools to Promote Shared Decision-Making in Lung Cancer Screening Using Low-Dose CT Scanning: A Systematic Review

Effect of a Patient Decision Aid on Lung Cancer Screening Decision-Making by Persons Who Smoke

The development of a decision aid to support Hodgkin lymphoma survivors considering lung cancer screening

Patient and Clinician Perspectives on Shared Decision-making in Early Adopting Lung Cancer Screening Programs: a Qualitative Study

Protocol of an iterative qualitative study to develop a molecular testing decision aid for shared decision-making in patients with lung cancer after surgery

Where was NYSDA when E-Prescribing was Passed?

Patient Perspectives on a Patient‐Facing Tool for Lung Cancer Screening

Impact of a Lung Cancer Screening Information Film on Informed Decision-making: A Randomized Trial.

Level density and level-spacing distributions of random, self-adjoint, non-Hermitian matrices.

The TELEhealth Shared decision-making COaching and navigation in Primary carE (TELESCOPE) intervention: a study protocol for delivering shared decision-making for lung cancer screening by patient navigators