Virtual Library
Start Your Search
B.E. Louie
Author of
-
+
P2.13 - Radiology/Staging/Screening (ID 714)
- Event: WCLC 2017
- Type: Poster Session with Presenters Present
- Track: Radiology/Staging/Screening
- Presentations: 1
- Moderators:
- Coordinates: 10/17/2017, 09:30 - 16:00, Exhibit Hall (Hall B + C)
-
+
P2.13-019 - Attrition Rate in Community-Based Lung Cancer Screening: One and Done (ID 10310)
09:30 - 09:30 | Author(s): B.E. Louie
- Abstract
Background:
Community-wide lung cancer screening has the potential to significantly impact lung cancer mortality. Thus, much emphasis has been placed on program development and recruitment of high-risk individuals. Lung cancer screening is a continuum, and shared decision-making focuses on the need for participants to remain engaged. Currently, little is known about screening follow-through in the community setting outside of clinical trials. Thus, we aimed to quantify the rate of attrition in our Lung Cancer Screening Program (LCSP) and identify contributing factors.
Method:
We reviewed all individuals enrolled in our LCSP, which is led by an independently practicing nurse practitioner within a multidisciplinary team, from 2012-2016. We identified all individuals who were closed out of the program, the closure date, and reason for closure. Of these, attrition was defined as declined further screening or lost to follow-up. A formal process for documentation of attrition included failure to respond to a written communication, a minimum of three contact attempts, and a clinical note forwarded to the referring provider.
Result:
Of the 520 individuals enrolled in the LCSP, 23% (122) were officially closed out. Thirteen percent (67/520) were closed out for clinical, geographic, or other identifiable reasons. Attrition from the program was identified to be 11% (55/520). Of the individuals that dropped out, 69% (38/55) were smoking upon enrollment compared to 52% (205/398) of retained individuals (p=0.014). In addition, 78% (43/55) had only one CT scan prior to attrition (Figure). Figure 1
Conclusion:
We identified an 11% attrition rate in our community-based LCSP. Individuals who failed to follow-up with the LCSP were more likely to be current smokers. The majority of individuals who failed to follow-up did not return after the initial CT scan. Future work needs to focus on promoting the continuum of screening and support the highest risk communities to minimize attrition.
