Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Feb 29;13(2):240-255.
doi: 10.21037/tlcr-23-623. Epub 2024 Feb 21.

"We need to work towards it, whatever it takes."-participation factors in the acceptability and feasibility of lung cancer screening in Australia: the perspectives of key stakeholders

Affiliations

"We need to work towards it, whatever it takes."-participation factors in the acceptability and feasibility of lung cancer screening in Australia: the perspectives of key stakeholders

Rachael Helen Dodd et al. Transl Lung Cancer Res. .

Abstract

Background: Low dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening, targeted at those at high-risk, has been shown to significantly reduce lung cancer mortality and detect cancers at an early stage. Practical, attitudinal and demographic factors can inhibit screening participation in high-risk populations. This study aimed to explore stakeholders' views about barriers and enablers (determinants) to participation in lung cancer screening (LCS) in Australia.

Methods: Twenty-four focus groups (range 2-5 participants) were conducted in 2021 using the Zoom platform. Participants were 84 health professionals, researchers, policy makers and program managers of current screening programs. Focus groups consisted of a structured presentation with facilitated discussion lasting about 1 hour. The content was analysed thematically and mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

Results: Screening determinants were identified across each stage of the proposed screening and assessment pathway. Challenges included participant factors such as encouraging participation for individuals at high-risk, whilst ensuring that access and equity issues were carefully considered in program design. The development of awareness campaigns that engaged LCS participants and health professionals, as well as streamlined referral processes for initial entry and follow-up, were strongly advocated for. Considering practical factors included the use of mobile vans in convenient locations.

Conclusions: Participants reported that LCS in Australia was acceptable and feasible. Participants identified a complex set of determinants across the proposed screening and assessment pathway. Strategies that enable the best chance for program success must be identified prior to implementation of a national LCS program.

Keywords: Lung cancer screening (LCS); barriers and facilitators; implementation; qualitative research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tlcr.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tlcr-23-623/coif). M.L.Y. reports the funding from an NHMRC Investigator Grant (APP 2018108). E.S. has received honoraria for lectures from AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and The Limbic, support to attend meetings from AstraZeneca LOBES 2022 and has received ad hoc advisory board payment from Bristol Myers Squibb. She holds leadership roles as Deputy Board Chair for the Thoracic Oncology Group of Australasia and Editor in Chief of JTO Clinical and Research Reports. She is the past Co-Convenor of the Tobacco and Related Substances Special Interest Group, Thoracic Society of Australasia. H.M. is supported by a Metro North Hospital and Health Service (Queensland, Australia) Clinical Academic Fellowship and an NHMRC Investigator Grant, and has received honoraria for lectures from AstraZeneca, funding for travel from International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC), and holds leadership roles for the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand (Convenor of Tobacco and Related Substances Special Interest Group) and IASLC (committee member). NMR reports the funding from an Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Ideas Grant (2019/GA65812). The other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Participant and health system factors identified (in blue ovals) during analysis including cross-cutting topics (in orange ovals), with the dotted line indicating those topics included within this manuscript.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021;71:209-49. 10.3322/caac.21660 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2023). Cancer data in Australia. Available online: https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/cancer/cancer-data-in-australia/contents...
    1. Greenhalgh EM, Bayly M, Jenkins S, et al. 1.3 Prevalence of smoking—adults. In: Greenhalgh EM, Scollo MM, Winstanley MH. editors. Tobacco in Australia: Facts and Issues. Melbourne: Cancer Council Victoria; 2023. Available online: https://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/chapter-1-prevalence/1-3-prevalenc...
    1. Moyer VA, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force . Screening for lung cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2014;160:330-8. 10.7326/M13-2771 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cancer Australia (2015). Position Statement: Lung Cancer Screening using Low-Dose Computed Tomography. Sydney, Australia.