Association of patient and health care organization factors with incidental nodule guidelines adherence: A multi-system observational study.

BACKGROUND: Health care organizations are increasingly developing systems to ensure patients with pulmonary nodules receive guideline-adherent care. Our goal was to determine patient and organization factors that are associated with radiologist adherence as well as clinician and patient concordance to 2005 Fleischner Society guidelines for incidental pulmonary nodule follow-up. MATERIALS: Trained researchers abstracted data from the electronic health record from two Veterans Affairs health care systems for patients with incidental pulmonary nodules as identified by interpreting radiologists from 2008 to 2016. METHODS: We classified radiology reports and patient follow-up into two categories. Radiologist-Fleischner Adherence was the agreement between the radiologist's recommendation in the computed tomography report and the 2005 Fleischner Society guidelines. Clinician/Patient-Fleischner Concordance was agreement between patient follow-up and the guidelines. We calculated multivariable-adjusted predicted probabilities for factors associated with Radiologist-Fleischner Adherence and Clinician/Patient-Fleischner Concordance. RESULTS: Among 3150 patients, 69% of radiologist recommendations were adherent to 2005 Fleischner guidelines, 4% were more aggressive, and 27% recommended less aggressive follow-up. Overall, only 48% of patients underwent follow-up concordant with 2005 Fleischner Society guidelines, 37% had less aggressive follow-up, and 15% had more aggressive follow-up. Radiologist-Fleischner Adherence was associated with Clinician/Patient-Fleischner Concordance with evidence for effect modification by health care system. CONCLUSION: Clinicians and patients seem to follow radiologists' recommendations but often do not obtain concordant follow-up, likely due to downstream differential processes in each health care system. Health care organizations need to develop comprehensive and rigorous tools to ensure high levels of appropriate follow-up for patients with pulmonary nodules.

Primary Care Providers Experiences Implementing Low-Dose Computed Tomography Recommendations for Lung Cancer Screening.

PURPOSE: Describe primary care providers' (PCPs) barriers and facilitators to implementation of lung cancer screening programs in rural settings. METHODS: We conducted qualitative interviews with PCPs practicing in rural Oregon from November 2019 to September 2020. The interview questions and analytic framework were informed by the 2009 Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We used inductive and deductive approaches for analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 15 key participants from 12 distinct health care systems. We identified several Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research factors affecting lung cancer screening implementation. 1) Most PCPs did not have workflows to assist in discussing screening and relied on their memory and knowledge of the patient's history to prompt discussions. PCPs supported screening and managed the patient throughout the process. 2) PCPs reported several patient-level barriers, including geographic access to lung cancer screening scans and out-of-pocket cost concerns. 3) PCPs reported that champions are necessary to create opportunities for local practices to adopt lung cancer screening programs. CONCLUSIONS: Rural-practicing PCPs were supportive of lung cancer screening, however workflow processes, time challenges, and patient-reported barriers remain impediments to improved screening in their clinics. We identified several areas for improvement in lung cancer screening implementation in rural primary care practices, ranging from designing clinic workflows and processes to designating clinic staff to support referral, screening, and follow-up care for patients.

Perspectives on advance care planning needs of persons with advanced dementia from their surrogates and clinicians.

Objectives: This study was designed to understand the experience and needs surrounding advance care planning (ACP) discussions for surrogate decision-makers of persons with advanced dementia (PWAD). Methods: Semi-structured qualitative interviews based on end-of-life communication models with a convenience sample of 17 clinicians, and 15 surrogates of PWAD. We used a hybrid approach of deductive and inductive thematic analysis. Results: Two main themes emerged. 1)Deficits in communication: Often surrogates did not fully comprehend the disease trajectory or medical treatments, like the likelihood of pneumonia and use of mechanical ventilation, nor concepts related to ACP, particularly legal documents and orders such as Do Not Hospitalize, which made decision-making challenging as perceived by clinicians. 2)Decision-making conflicts: Clinicians perceived a disconnect between surrogates' understanding of their loved one's preferences and knowing how or when to operationalize them. Conclusions: Significant gaps in knowledge surrounding disease trajectory and complications, such as pneumonia, and aspects of ACP, exist. These gaps create decision-making challenges for surrogates and clinicians alike. Innovation: This study assessed both clinicians and surrogate decision-makers' perspectives on communication and decision-making concerning care preferences, goals, and ACP. The study findings from a national cohort can inform decision-support interventions for clinicians and surrogate decision-makers of PWAD.

"It Is A Carrot-Stick Model": A Qualitative Study of Rural-Serving Clinician and Rural-Residing Veteran Perceptions of Requirements to Quit Smoking prior to Elective Surgery.

Introduction: Some medical centers and surgeons require patients to stop smoking cigarettes prior to elective orthopaedic surgeries in an effort to decrease surgical complications. Given higher rates of smoking among rural individuals, rural patients may be disproportionately impacted by these requirements. We assessed the perceptions and experiences of rural-residing Veterans and clinicians related to this requirement. Methods: We conducted qualitative semistructured one-on-one interviews of 26 rural-residing veterans, 10 VA orthopaedic surgery staff (from two Veterans Integrated Services Networks), 24 PCPs who serve rural veterans (14 VA; 10 non-VA), and 4 VA pharmacists. Using the knowledge, attitudes, and behavior framework, we performed conventional content analysis. Results: We found three primary themes across respondents: (1) knowledge of and the evidence base for the requirement varied widely; (2) strong personal attitudes toward the requirement; and (3) implementation and possible implications of this requirement. All surgery staff reported knowledge of requirements at their institution. VA PCPs reported knowledge of requirements but typically could not recall specifics. Most patients were unaware. The majority of respondents felt this requirement could increase motivation to quit smoking. Some PCPs felt a more thorough explanation of smoking-related complications would result in increased quit attempts. About half of all patients reported belief that the requirement was reasonable regardless of initial awareness. Respondents expressed little concern that the requirement might increase rural-urban disparities. Most PCPs and patients felt that there should be exceptions for allowing surgery, while surgical staff disagreed. Discussion. Most respondents thought elective surgery was a good motivator to quit smoking; but patients, PCPs, and surgical staff differed on whether there should be exceptions to the requirement that patients quit preoperatively. Future efforts to augment perioperative smoking cessation may benefit from improving coordination across services and educating patients more about the benefits of quitting.

Implementing Smoking Cessation Telehealth Technologies Within the VHA: Lessons Learned.

Background: Health care systems need to reach patients who are smokers and connect them to evidence-based resources that can help them quit. Telehealth, such as an interactive voice response (IVR) system, may be one solution, but there is no roadmap to develop or implement an IVR system within the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Observations: We describe the development and implemention of IVR at the VA Portland Health Care System in Oregon to proactively reach veterans who use tobacco and connect them with cessation resources. We coordinated with local departments to verify the necessary processes and strategies that are important. We recommend several questions to ask the IVR vendor and be prepared to answer before contract finalization. The Patient Engagement, Tracking, and Long-term Support (PETALS) initiative may be an excellent place to start for VA IVR-related questions and can be used for IVR initiation within the VA, but other vendors will be needed for nonresearch purposes. Finally, we describe the process timeline and steps to help potential users. Conclusions: IVR systems, once they are developed and implemented, can be efficient, low-cost, resource-nonintensive solutions that can effectively connect patients with needed health care services. Developing an IVR system within the VA was challenging for our research team. We experienced a large learning curve during implementation and hope that our experience and lessons will help VA personnel in the future.

Emotional Distress, Anxiety, and General Health Status in Patients With Newly Identified Small Pulmonary Nodules: Results From the Watch the Spot Trial.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety and emotional distress have not been studied in large, diverse samples of patients with pulmonary nodules. RESEARCH QUESTION: How common are anxiety and distress in patients with newly identified pulmonary nodules, and what factors are associated with these outcomes? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This study surveyed participants in the Watch the Spot Trial, a large, pragmatic clinical trial of more vs less intensive strategies for radiographic surveillance of patients with small pulmonary nodules. The survey included validated instruments to measure patient-centered outcomes such as nodule-related emotional distress (Impact of Event Scale-Revised) and anxiety (Six-Item State Anxiety Inventory) 6 to 8 weeks following nodule identification. Mixed-effects models were used to compare outcomes between study arms following adjustment for potential confounders and clustering within enrollment site, while also examining a limited number of prespecified explanatory factors, including nodule size, mode of detection, type of ordering clinician, and lack of timely notification prior to contact by the study team. RESULTS: The trial enrolled 34,699 patients; 2,049 individuals completed the baseline survey (5.9%). Respondents and nonrespondents had similar demographic and nodule characteristics, although more respondents were non-Hispanic and White. Impact of Event Scale-Revised scores indicated mild, moderate, or severe distress in 32.2%, 9.4%, and 7.2% of respondents, respectively, with no difference in scores between study arms. Following adjustment, greater emotional distress was associated with larger nodule size and lack of timely notification by a clinician; distress was also associated with younger age, female sex, ever smoking, Black race, and Hispanic ethnicity. Anxiety was associated with lack of timely notification, ever smoking, and female sex. INTERPRETATION: Almost one-half of respondents experienced emotional distress 6 to 8 weeks following pulmonary nodule identification. Strategies are needed to mitigate the burden of distress, especially in younger, female, ever smoking, and minoritized patients, and those with larger nodules. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02623712; URL: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.

Relationships among clinicians are crucial to successful palliative care integration: a qualitative study in lung cancer.

Aims: Palliative care integration improves quality of life among patients with lung cancer and their families. Despite these benefits, significant barriers persist and patients do not receive timely integration. This study sought to identify facilitators of and barriers to integration in lung cancer care. Materials & methods: Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted with palliative care and lung cancer clinicians and analyzed using traditional content analysis. 23 clinicians were interviewed from geographically dispersed hospitals within a national healthcare system. Results: Palliative care integration improved over time, enhanced by several facilitators stratified at four levels (patient/clinician/hospital/organization). Most important among these was multidisciplinary care delivered in outpatient settings, fostering trust and relationships among clinicians which were pivotal to successful integration. Workforce shortages and limited use of primary palliative care among lung cancer clinicians need to be addressed for continued growth in the field. Conclusion: Relationships among clinicians are crucial to successful palliative care integration in lung cancer care.

Palliative care is a form of supportive care for patients with a serious illness that improves quality of life among patients with lung cancer and their families. Unfortunately, many patients do not receive this care until they are near the end of life. This study sought to explore clinicians' perspectives regarding ways to enhance the use of palliative care among patients with lung cancer. Using interviews of clinicians from geographically dispersed hospitals within a national healthcare system, the authors explored reasons and potential solutions to improve palliative care delivery. One of the most important factors in enhancing palliative care use was fostering trust and relationships among palliative care and lung cancer clinicians. Workforce shortages also need to be addressed for continued growth in the field of palliative care. Relationships among clinicians are crucial to successful palliative care integration in lung cancer care.

VA-Delivered or VA-Purchased Care: Important Factors for Veterans Navigating Care Decisions.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The VA MISSION Act aimed to increase Veterans' access to care by allowing eligible Veterans to use VA-paid care from non-VA providers ("VA-purchased care"). We interviewed Veterans who were eligible for both VA-delivered and VA-purchased care to examine factors they consider when making decisions about whether to use VA-delivered or VA-purchased care. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 28 Veterans across the USA who were eligible for VA-delivered and VA-purchased care, using deductive and inductive analysis to develop themes. Participants were recruited from a survey about healthcare access and decision-making. More than half of participants lived in rural areas, 21 were men, and 25 were > 50 years old. KEY RESULTS: Veteran participants identified (1) high-quality relationships with providers based on mutual trust, empathy, authenticity, and continuity of care, and (2) a positive environment or "eco-system of care" characterized by supportive interactions with staff and other Veterans, and exemplary customer service as integral to their decisions about where to receive care. These preferences influenced their engagement with VA and non-VA providers. We discovered corresponding findings related to Veterans' information needs. When making decisions around where to receive care, participants said they would like more information about VA and non-VA providers and services, and about coordination of care and referrals, including understanding processes and implications of utilizing VA-purchased care. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Current VA-purchased care eligibility determinations focus on common access metrics (e.g., wait times, distance to care). Yet, Veterans discussed other important factors for navigating care decisions, including patient-provider relationship quality and the larger healthcare environment (e.g., interactions with staff and other Veterans). Our findings point to the need for health systems to collect and provide information on these aspects of care to ensure care decisions reflect what is important to Veterans when navigating where to receive care.

"You're Socially Distant and Trying Not to Be Emotionally Distant." Physicians' Perspectives of Communication and Therapeutic Relationships in the ICU During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study.

To: 1) characterize how COVID-19-related policies influence patient-clinician communication and relationships in the ICU, with attention to race and ethnicity as factors and 2) identify interventions that may facilitate patient-clinician communication. DESIGN: We conducted a qualitative study between September 2020 and February 2021 that explored facilitators and barriers to patient-clinician communication and the formation of therapeutic relationships. We used thematic analysis to develop findings describing patient-communication and therapeutic relationships within the ICU early in the COVID-19 pandemic. SETTING: We purposively selected hospital dyads from regions in the United States that experienced early and/or large surges of patients hospitalized with COVID-19. SUBJECTS: We recruited a national sample of ICU physicians from Veteran Affairs (VA) Health Care Systems and their associated academic affiliate hospitals. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-four intensivists from seven VA hospitals and six academic-affiliate hospitals participated. Intensivists noted the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on among people holding minoritized racial and ethnic identities, describing how language barriers and restrictive visitation policies exacerbated institutional mistrust and compromised physicians' ability to develop therapeutic relationships. We also identified several perceived influences on patient-clinician communication and the establishment of therapeutic relationships. Barriers included physicians' fear of becoming infected with COVID-19 and use of personal protective equipment, which created obstacles to effective physical and verbal interactions. Facilitators included the presence of on-site interpreters, use of web-based technology to interact with family members outside the ICU, and designation of a care team member or specialist service to provide routine updates to families. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic has threatened patient-clinician communication and the development of therapeutic relationships in the ICU, particularly among people holding minoritized racial and ethnic identities and their families. We identified several facilitators to improve patient-clinician communication as perceived by intensivists that may help improve trust and foster therapeutic alliances.

Use of Veterans Health Administration Structured Data to Identify Patients Eligible for Lung Cancer Screening.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer screening (LCS) uptake is low. Assessing patients' cigarette pack-years and years since quitting is challenging given the lack of documentation in structured electronic health record data. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We used a convenience sample of patients with a chest CT scan in the Veterans Health Administration. We abstracted data on cigarette use from electronic health record notes to determine LCS eligibility based on the 2021 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force age and cigarette use eligibility criteria. We used these data as the "ground truth" of LCS eligibility to compare them with structured data regarding tobacco use and a COPD diagnosis. We calculated sensitivity and specificity as well as fast-and-frugal decision trees. RESULTS: For 50-80-year-old veterans identified as former or current tobacco users, we obtained 94% sensitivity and 47% specificity. For 50-80-year-old veterans identified as current tobacco users, we obtained 59% sensitivity and 79% specificity. Our fast-and-frugal decision tree that included a COPD diagnosis had a sensitivity of 69% and a specificity of 60%. CONCLUSION: These results can help health care systems make their LCS outreach efforts more efficient and give administrators and researchers a simple method to estimate their number of possibly eligible patients.

"It's a decision I have to make": Patient perspectives on smoking and cessation after lung cancer screening decisions.

Few studies exist showing that involvement in lung cancer screening (LCS) leads to a change in rates of cigarette smoking. We investigated LCS longitudinally to determine whether teachable moments for smoking cessation occur downstream from the initial provider-patient LCS shared decision-making discussion and self-reported effects on smoking behaviors. We performed up to two successive semi-structured interviews to assess the experiences of 39 individuals who formerly or currently smoked cigarettes who underwent LCS decision-making discussions performed during routine care from three established US medical center LCS programs. The majority of those who remembered hearing about the importance of smoking cessation after LCS-related encounters did not report communication about smoking influencing their motivation to quit or abstain from smoking, including patients who were found to have pulmonary nodules. Patients experienced little distress related to LCS discussions. Patients reported that there were other, more significant, reasons for quitting or abstinence. They recommended clinicians continue to ask about smoking at every clinical encounter, provide information comparing the benefits of LCS with those of quitting smoking, and have clinicians help them identify triggers or other motivators for improving smoking behaviors. Our findings suggest that there may be other teachable moment opportunities outside of LCS processes that could be utilized to motivate smoking reduction or cessation, or LCS processes could be improved to integrate cessation resources.

Study design for a proactive teachable moment tobacco treatment intervention among patients with pulmonary nodules.

INTRODUCTION: We developed Teachable Moment to Opt-Out of Tobacco (TeaM OUT) as a tobacco treatment intervention based on a foundation of a theoretical model of teachable moments, "naturally occurring life transitions or health events thought to motivate individuals to spontaneously adopt risk-reducing health behaviors". The TeaM OUT intervention combines a teachable moment for patients with newly detected incidental pulmonary nodules with a proactive interactive voice response (IVR) system to increase connections to evidence-based tobacco treatment interventions. METHODS: We will perform a convergent, nested observational mixed-methods study utilizing both randomized trial and observational methods to test the effectiveness and generalizability of the TeaM OUT intervention through three aims. AIM 1: Among patients recently diagnosed with a pulmonary nodule, we will utilize a pragmatic, stepped wedge randomized controlled design to evaluate the effectiveness of a proactive, teachable moment-based, tobacco treatment outreach intervention (TeaM OUT) on increasing engagement with tobacco treatment resources compared to Enhanced Usual Care. AIM 2: Using a longitudinal observational design, we will evaluate the association of receipt of the TeaM OUT intervention with seven-day point abstinence prevalence and quit motivation compared to Enhanced Usual Care. AIM 3: Qualitatively elicit perspectives from key stakeholders to inform acceptability and utility, implementation barriers and facilitators, and scalability of the TeaM OUT intervention. DISCUSSION: We are hopeful that implementation of TeaM OUT will increase the number of patients who quit using cigarettes with subsequent improvements in their health.

Patient-clinician communication and patient-centered outcomes among patients with suspected stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a prospective cohort study.

Among patients with suspected early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we sought to evaluate the association of patient-clinician communication (PCC) with patient-centered outcomes (PCOs). We conducted a multicenter, prospective cohort study examining PCOs at five time points, up to 12-months post-treatment. We used generalized estimating equation (GEE) models adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables to examine the relationship between PCC (dichotomized as high- or low-quality) and decisional conflict, treatment self-efficacy, and anxiety. The cohort included 165 patients who were 62% male with a mean age of 70.7 ± SD 8.1 years. Adjusted GEE analysis including 810 observations revealed high-quality PCC was associated with no decisional conflict (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.14, 95% CI = 0.07 to 0.27) and higher self-efficacy (ß = -0.26, 95% CI = -0.37 to -0.14). High-quality PCC was not associated with moderately severe anxiety (aOR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.41 to 1.09), though was associated with decreased anxiety scores (ß = -3.91, 95% CI = -6.48 to -1.35). Among individuals with suspected early-stage NSCLC, high-quality PCC is associated with less decisional conflict and higher self-efficacy; the relationship with anxiety is unclear. Clinicians should prioritize enhanced treatment-related communication at critical and vulnerable periods in the cancer care trajectory to improve PCOs.

The Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Intensivists' Well-Being: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has strained health care systems and has resulted in widespread critical care staffing shortages, negatively impacting the quality of care delivered. RESEARCH QUESTION: How have hospitals' emergency responses to the pandemic influenced the well-being of frontline intensivists, and do any potential strategies exist to improve their well-being and to help preserve the critical care workforce? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews of intensivists at clusters of tertiary and community hospitals located in six regions across the United States between August and November 2020 using the "four S" framework of acute surge planning (ie, space, staff, stuff, and system) to organize the interview guide. We then used inductive thematic analysis to identify themes describing the influence of hospitals' emergency responses on intensivists' well-being. RESULTS: Thirty-three intensivists from seven tertiary and six community hospitals participated. Intensivists reported experiencing substantial moral distress, particularly because of restricted visitor policies and their perceived negative impacts on patients, families, and staff. Intensivists also frequently reported burnout symptoms as a result of their experiences with patient death, exhaustion over the pandemic's duration, and perceived lack of support from colleagues and hospitals. We identified several potentially modifiable factors perceived to improve morale, including the proactive provision of mental health resources, establishment of formal backup schedules for physicians, and clear actions demonstrating that clinicians are valued by their institutions. INTERPRETATION: Restrictive visitation policies contributed to moral distress as reported by intensivists, highlighting the need to reconsider the risks and benefits of these policies. We also identified several interventions as perceived by intensivists that may help to mitigate moral distress and to improve burnout as part of efforts to preserve the critical care workforce.

The Chain of Adherence for Incidentally Detected Pulmonary Nodules after an Initial Radiologic Imaging Study: A Multisystem Observational Study.

Rationale: Millions of people are diagnosed with incidental pulmonary nodules every year. Although most nodules are benign, it is universally recommended that all patients be assessed to determine appropriate follow-up and ensure that it is obtained. Objectives: To determine the degree of concordance and adherence to 2005 Fleischner Society guidelines among radiologists, clinicians, and patients at two Veterans Affairs healthcare systems with incidental nodule tracking systems. Methods: Trained researchers abstracted data from the electronic health records of patients with incidental pulmonary nodules as identified by interpreting radiologists from 2008 to 2016. We classified radiology reports and patient follow-up into three categories. Radiologist-Fleischner adherence was the agreement between the radiologist's recommendation in the computed tomography (CT) report and the 2005 Fleischner Society guidelines. Clinician/patient-Fleischner concordance was agreement between patient follow-up and the guidelines. Clinician/patient-radiologist adherence was agreement between the radiologist's recommendation and patient follow-up. We evaluated whether the recommendation or follow-up was more (e.g., sooner) or less (e.g., later) aggressive than recommended. Results: After exclusions, 4,586 patients with 7,408 imaging tests (n = 4,586 initial chest CT scans; n = 2,717 follow-up chest CT scans; n = 105 follow-up low-dose CT scans) were included. Among radiology reports that could be classified in terms of Fleischner Society guidelines (n = 3,150), 80% had nonmissing radiologist recommendations. Among those reports, radiologist-Fleischner adherence was 86.6%, with 4.8% more aggressive and 8.6% less aggressive. Among patients whose initial scans could be classified, clinician/patient-Fleischner concordance was 46.0%, 14.5% were more aggressive, and 39.5% were less aggressive. Clinician/patient-radiologist adherence was 54.3%. Veterans whose radiology reports were adherent to Fleischner Society guidelines had a substantially higher proportion of clinician/patient-Fleischner concordance: 52.0% concordance among radiologist-Fleischner adherent versus 11.6% concordance among radiologist-Fleischner nonadherent. Conclusions: In this multi-health system observational study of incidental pulmonary nodule follow-up, we found that radiologist adherence to 2005 Fleischner Society guidelines may be necessary but not sufficient. Our results highlight the many facets of care processes that must occur to achieve guideline-concordant care.

Show me the roads and give me a road map: Development of a patient conversation tool to improve lung cancer treatment decision-making.

Objective: Evidence-based decision support resources do not exist for persons with lung cancer. We sought to develop and refine a treatment decision support, or conversation tool, to improve shared decision-making (SDM). Methods: We conducted a multi-site study among patients with stage I-IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who completed or had ongoing lung cancer treatment using semi-structured, cognitive qualitative interviews to assess participant understanding of content. We used an integrated approach of deductive and inductive thematic analysis. Results: Twenty-seven patients with NSCLC participated. Participants with prior cancer experiences or those with family members with prior cancer experiences reported better preparedness for cancer treatment decision-making. All participants agreed the conversation tool would be helpful to clarify their thinking about values, comparisons, and goals of treatment, and to help patients communicate more effectively with their clinicians. Conclusion: Participants reported that the tool may empower them with confidence and agency to actively participate in cancer treatment SDM. The conversation tool was acceptable, comprehensible, and usable. Next steps will test effectiveness on patient-centered and decisional outcomes. Innovation: A personalized conversation tool using consequence tables and core SDM components is novel in that it can encourage a tailored, conversational dynamic and includes patient-centered values along with traditional decisional outcomes.

The Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on ICU Organization, Care Processes, and Frontline Clinician Experiences: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in unprecedented adjustments to ICU organization and care processes globally. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: Did hospital emergency responses to the COVID-19 pandemic differ depending on hospital setting? Which strategies worked well to mitigate strain as perceived by intensivists? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Between August and November 2020, we carried out semistructured interviews of intensivists from tertiary and community hospitals across six regions in the United States that experienced early or large surges of COVID-19 patients, or both. We identified themes of hospital emergency responses using the four S framework of acute surge planning: space, staff, stuff, system. RESULTS: Thirty-three intensivists from seven tertiary and six community hospitals participated. Clinicians across both settings believed that canceling elective surgeries was helpful to increase ICU capabilities and that hospitals should establish clearly defined thresholds at which surgeries are limited during future surge events. ICU staff was the most limited resource; staff shortages were improved by the use of tiered staffing models, just-in-time training for non-ICU clinicians, designated treatment teams, and deployment of trainees. Personal protective equipment (PPE) shortages and reuse were widespread, causing substantial distress among clinicians; hands-on PPE training was helpful to reduce clinicians' anxiety. Transparency and involvement of frontline clinicians as stakeholders were important components of effective emergency responses and helped to maintain trust among staff. INTERPRETATION: We identified several strategies potentially to mitigate strain as perceived by intensivists working in both tertiary and community hospital settings. Our study also demonstrated the importance of trust and transparency between frontline staff and hospital leadership as key components of effective emergency responses during public health crises.

"It's Really Like Any Other Study": Rural Radiology Facilities Performing Low-Dose Computed Tomography for Lung Cancer Screening.

Rationale: The majority of eligible people have not been screened for lung cancer. There is emerging evidence that there are location-based disparities applicable to lung cancer screening (LCS). Objectives: To describe LCS radiologic services in rural Oregon and understand the barriers and facilitators to implementation of LCS using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT). Methods: This was a mixed-method descriptive study using surveys and semistructured interviews of key informants. We approached representatives from all 37 small and rural hospitals in Oregon. We purposively interviewed key informants from a subset based on LDCT implementation outcomes. Results: We surveyed representatives from 29 radiology facilities and qualitatively interviewed 18 key informants from 19 facilities (representing 12 healthcare systems). Among the surveyed radiology facilities, 59% were performing LDCT for LCS. Key informants reported that facilities that performed this service were often motivated by community needs and were less motivated by financial gain or evidence strength, and all described the importance of having a champion. Key informants described that LCS programmatic components that were within their normal scope of practice (e.g., specifying the LDCT parameters) were burdensome to establish but that barriers were surmountable. Most informants reported they did not perform other components of high-quality programs (e.g., ensuring adherence to recommended follow-up testing) and suggested that these steps were important but were the responsibility of primary care providers. Conclusions: Many rural hospital facilities in Oregon offer LDCT for LCS but do not perform all the recommended components of a screening program. Disparities in LCS use and adherence are unlikely to be solved by an exclusive focus at the radiology facility level and may require additional interventions at the primary care level.