Increasing Lung Cancer Screening for High-Risk Smokers in a Frontier Population.

Northern Plains American Indians (AIs) have some of the highest smoking and lung cancer mortality rates in the USA. They are a high-risk population in which many are eligible for low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening, but such screening is rarely used. This study investigated methods to increase LDCT utilization through both a provider and community intervention to lower lung cancer mortality rates. This study used the Precaution Adoption Model for provider and community interventions implemented in four study regions in western South Dakota. The goal was to increase LDCT screening for eligible participants. Intake surveys and LDCT screenings were compared at baseline and 6 months following the education programs for both interventions. A total of 131 providers participated in the provider intervention. At the 6-month follow-up survey, 31 (63%) referred at least one patient for LDCT (p < 0.05). Forty (32.3%) community participants reported their provider recommended an LDCT and of those, 30(75%) reported getting an LDCT (p < 0.05). A total of 2829 patient surveys were completed at the imaging sites and most (88%, n = 962) cited provider recommendation as their reason for obtaining an LDCT. Almost half (46%; n = 131) of the referring providers attended a provider education workshop, and 73% of the providers worked at a clinic that hosted at least one community education session. Over the study period, LDCT utilization increased from 640 to 1706, a 90.9% increase. The provider intervention had the strongest impact on LDCT utilization. This study demonstrated increased LDCT utilization through the provider intervention but increases also were documented for the other intervention combinations. The community-based education program increased both community and provider awareness on the value of LDCTs to lower lung cancer mortality rates.

Sensitivity of US Preventive Services Task Force and PLCOm2012 lung cancer screening eligibility criteria in individuals with lung cancer in South Dakota self-reporting as Indigenous and non-Indigenous.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths. Screening individuals who are at elevated risk using low-dose computed tomography reduces lung cancer mortality by ≥20%. Individuals who have community-based factors that contribute to an increased risk of developing lung cancer have high lung cancer rates and are diagnosed at younger ages. In this study of lung cancer in South Dakota, the authors compared the sensitivity of screening eligibility criteria for self-reported Indigenous race and evaluated the need for screening at younger ages. METHODS: US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2013 and 2021 (USPSTF2013 and USPSTF2021) criteria and two versions of the PLCOm2012 risk-prediction model (based on the 2012 Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian [PLCO] Cancer Screening Trial), one with a predictor for race and one without, were applied at USPSTF-equivalent thresholds of ≥1.7% in 6 years and ≥1.0% in 6 years to 1565 individuals who were sequentially diagnosed with lung cancer (of whom 12.7% self-reported as Indigenous) at the Monument Health Cancer Care Institute in South Dakota (2010-2019). RESULTS: Eligibility sensitivities of USPSTF criteria did not differ significantly between individuals who self-reported their race as Indigenous and those who did not (p > .05). Sensitivities of both PLCOm2012 models were significantly higher than comparable USPSTF criteria. The sensitivity of USPSTF2021 criteria was 66.1% and, for comparable PLCOm2012 models with and without race, sensitivity was 90.7% and 89.6%, respectively (both p < .001); 1.4% of individuals were younger than 50 years, and proportions did not differ by Indigenous classification (p = .518). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in screening eligibility were not observed for individuals who self-reported their race as Indigenous. USPSTF criteria had lower sensitivities for lung cancer eligibility. Both PLCOm2012 models had high sensitivities, with higher sensitivity for the model that included race. The PLCOm2012noRace model selected effectively in this population, and screening individuals younger than 50 years did not appear to be justified. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths. Studies show that using low-dose computed tomography scans to screen people who smoke or who used to smoke and are at elevated risk for lung cancer reduces lung cancer deaths. This study of 1565 individuals with lung cancer in South Dakota compared screening eligibility using US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria and a lung cancer risk-prediction model (PLCOm2012; from the 2012 Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian [PLCO] Cancer Screening Trial). The model had higher sensitivity and picked more people with lung cancer to screen compared with USPSTF criteria. Eligibility sensitivities were similar for individuals who self-reported as Indigenous versus those who did not between USPSTF criteria and the model.

Great Plains American Indians' Perspectives on Patient and Family Needs Throughout the Cancer Journey.

PURPOSE: To explore the perspectives on patient and family needs during cancer treatment and survivorship of American Indian (AI) cancer survivors, caregivers, Tribal leaders, and healers. PARTICIPANTS & SETTING: 36 AI cancer survivors from three reservations in the Great Plains region. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: A community-based participatory research design was employed. Postcolonial Indigenous research techniques of talking circles and semistructured interviews were used to gather qualitative data. Data were analyzed using content analysis to identify themes. FINDINGS: The overarching theme of accompaniment was identified. The following themes were intertwined with this theme: (a) the need for home health care, with the subthemes of family support and symptom management; and (b) patient and family education. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: To provide high-quality cancer care to AI patients in their home communities, oncology clinicians should collaborate with local care providers, relevant organizations, and the Indian Health Service to identify and develop essential services. Future efforts must emphasize culturally responsive interventions in which Tribal community health workers serve as navigators to accompany patients and families during treatment and in survivorship.

Factors Influencing Palliative Care Access and Delivery for Great Plains American Indians.

CONTEXT: Despite the known importance of culturally tailored palliative care (PC), American Indian people (AIs) in the Great Plains lack access to such services. While clinicians caring for AIs in the Great Plains have long acknowledged major barriers to serious illness care, there is a paucity of literature describing specific factors influencing PC access and delivery for AI patients living on reservation land. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore factors influencing PC access and delivery on reservation land in the Great Plains to inform the development culturally tailored PC services for AIs. METHODS: Three authors recorded and transcribed interviews with 21 specialty and 17 primary clinicians. A data analysis team of seven authors analyzed transcripts using conventional content analysis. The analysis team met over Zoom to engage in code negotiation, classify codes, and develop themes. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis of interview data revealed four themes encompassing factors influencing palliative care delivery and access for Great Plains American Indians: health care system operations (e.g., hospice and home health availability, fragmented services), geography (e.g., weather, travel distances), workforce elements (e.g., care continuity, inadequate staffing, cultural familiarity), and historical trauma and racism. CONCLUSION: Our findings emphasize the importance of addressing the time and cost of travel for seriously ill patients, increasing home health and hospice availability on reservations, and improving trust in the medical system. Strengthening the AI medical workforce, increasing funding for the Indian Health Service, and transitioning the governance of reservation health care to Tribal entities may improve the trustworthiness of the medical system.

A randomized trial to reduce smoking among American Indians in South Dakota: The walking forward study.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is an important public health issue, particularly among American Indians (AIs). The reported decline in tobacco use for most racial/ethnic groups is not observed among AIs. This project was designed to address the research question, "Why don't more Northern Plains American Indians alter tobacco use behaviors known to increase the risk of cancer?" METHODS: Guided by the Theory of Planned Behavior, a multi-component intervention study was implemented. Adult AIs, age 18 years or older and currently smoking, were enrolled. Eligible subjects were randomized to one of 15 groups and exposed to either a MINIMAL or an INTENSE level of 4 intervention components. The intervention was delivered face-to-face or via telephone by Patient Navigators (PN). The primary outcome was self-reported abstinence from smoking verified by carbon monoxide measurement. RESULTS: At 18 months post-quit date, 88% of those who were still in the study were abstinent. This included 6% of all participants who enrolled in the study (14/254) and 13% of those who made it to the quit date (14/108). No intervention groups were found to have significant proportions of participants who were abstinent from smoking at the quit date (visit 5) or primary outcome visit (18 months post-quit date, visit 11), but use of pharmacologic support for abstinence was found to be an effective strategy for individuals who continued participation throughout the study. Those who remained in the study received more visits and were more likely to be abstinent. CONCLUSIONS: Use of NRT increased the odds of not smoking, as assessed at the 18-month follow-up visit, but no other interventions were found to significantly contribute to abstinence from smoking. Although the intervention protocol included numerous points of contact between CRRs and participants (11 visits) loss to follow-up was extensive with only 16/254 remaining enrolled. Additional research is needed to improve understanding of factors that influence enrollment and retention in smoking cessation interventions for AI and other populations.

Reality Versus Grant Application Research "Plans".

This article describes the implementation of the American Indian mHealth Smoking Dependence Study focusing on the differences between what was written in the grant application compared to what happened in reality. The study was designed to evaluate a multicomponent intervention involving 256 participants randomly assigned to one of 15 groups. Participants received either a minimal or an intense level of four intervention components: (1) nicotine replacement therapy, (2) precessation counseling, (3) cessation counseling, and (4) mHealth text messaging. The project team met via biweekly webinars as well as one to two in-person meetings per year throughout the study. The project team openly shared progress and challenges and collaborated to find proactive solutions to address challenges as compared to what was planned in the original grant application. The project team used multiple strategies to overcome unanticipated intervention issues: (1) cell phone challenges, (2) making difficult staffing decisions, (3) survey lessons, (4) nicotine replacement therapy, (5) mHealth text messages, (6) motivational interviewing counseling sessions, and (7) use of e-cigarettes. Smoking cessation studies should be designed based on the grant plans. However, on the ground reality issues needed to be addressed to assure the scientific rigor and innovativeness of this study.

Knowledge and screening of head and neck cancer among American Indians in South Dakota.

OBJECTIVES: We established the level of awareness of risk factors and early symptoms of head and neck cancer among American Indians in South Dakota and determined whether head and neck cancer screening detected clinical findings in this population. METHODS: We used the European About Face survey. We added questions about human papillomavirus, a risk factor for head and neck cancer, and demographics. Surveys were administered at 2 public events in 2011. Participants could partake in a head and neck cancer screening at the time of survey administration. RESULTS: Of the 205 American Indians who completed the survey, 114 participated in the screening. Mean head and neck cancer knowledge scores were 26 out of 44. Level of education was the only factor that predicted higher head and neck cancer knowledge (b = 0.90; P = .01). Nine (8%) people had positive head and neck cancer screening examination results. All abnormal clinical findings were in current or past smokers (P = .06). CONCLUSIONS: There are gaps in American Indian knowledge of head and neck cancer risk factors and symptoms. Community-based head and neck cancer screening in this population is feasible and may be a way to identify early abnormal clinical findings in smokers.

Patient navigation for American Indians undergoing cancer treatment: utilization and impact on care delivery in a regional healthcare center.

BACKGROUND: A study was undertaken to assess patient navigation utilization and its impact on treatment interruptions and clinical trial enrollment among American Indian cancer patients. METHODS: Between February 2004 and September 2009, 332 American Indian cancer patients received patient navigation services throughout cancer treatment. The patient navigation program provided culturally competent navigators to assist patients with navigating cancer therapy, obtaining medications, insurance issues, communicating with medical providers, and travel and lodging logistics. Data on utilization and trial enrollment were prospectively collected. Data for a historical control group of 70 American Indian patients who did not receive patient navigation services were used to compare treatment interruptions among those undergoing patient navigation during curative radiation therapy (subgroup of 123 patients). RESULTS: The median number of contacts with a navigator was 12 (range, 1-119). The median time spent with the navigator at first contact was 40 minutes (range, 10-250 minutes), and it was 15 minutes for subsequent contacts. Patients treated with radiation therapy with curative intent who underwent patient navigation had fewer days of treatment interruption (mean, 1.7 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.2 days) than historical controls who did not receive patient navigation services (mean, 4.9 days; 95% CI, 2.9-6.9 days). Of the 332 patients, 72 (22%; 95% CI, 17%-26%) were enrolled on a clinical treatment trial or cancer control protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Patient navigation was associated with fewer treatment interruptions and relatively high rates of clinical trial enrollment among American Indian cancer patients compared with national reports.