Virtual Library
Start Your Search
K. Costas
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)
-
+
P2.13-021 - Community Network Lung Cancer Screening Experience Underrepresents Medically Underserved and Geographically Remote Individuals (ID 10402)
09:30 - 09:30 | Author(s): K. Costas
- Abstract
Background:
The National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) demonstrated a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality. However, it’s study centers may not have represented remote populations with low socioeconomic status and/or health care access. Previous reports on other cancers have demonstrated higher rates of screening in urban populations, with lower adoption in underserved and geographically remote communities. We aimed to quantify the proportion of screened individuals from medically underserved and geographically remote areas represented in our multi-state hospital network lung cancer screening programs (LCSPs).
Method:
We performed a multi-institution review using data from individuals enrolled in Pacific Northwest LCSPs, which form part of a multi-state hospital network. Individuals from programs spanning Washington State, Oregon, Montana, and Alaska from 2012-2016 were included. Definitions include: medically underserved area [MUA; healthcare resources deficient region], medically underserved population [MUP; area with economic/cultural/linguistic barriers to primary care services], health professional shortage area [HPSA; primary care physician shortage].
Result:
We identified a total of 2,379 screening participants. Of these, 22% (529) resided in a medically underserved area and 5% (108) were from a medically underserved population. Only 9% (216) resided in a HPSA, compared to the combined state data reporting a rate of 20% HPSA residents. Individuals lived a median of 6 miles from the screening site. Data stratified by state is shown in the figure, and demonstrates a high capture rate of individuals residing in MUAs in Montana. Figure 1
Conclusion:
All sites showed poor penetration into communities identified as MUPs and HPSAs. All sites also had poor penetration into MUAs; except for Montana, likely due to its overwhelming rural nature. However, the vast majority of screening participants lived in close proximity to screening centers. Therefore, novel approaches such as telemedicine and mobile screening clinics may be needed to reach underserved populations for LCS.
