Impact of a Lung Cancer Screening Counseling and Shared Decision-Making Visit

Published:February 03, 2017DOI:


      Lung cancer screening is a complex balance of benefits and harms. A counseling and shared decision-making visit has been mandated to assist patients with the decision about participation in screening. To our knowledge, the impact of this visit on patient understanding and decisions has not been studied.


      We developed a centralized counseling and shared decision-making visit for our lung cancer screening program. The visit included confirmation of eligibility for screening, education supported by a narrated slide show, individualized risk assessment with a decision aid, time for answering questions, and data collection. We surveyed consecutive patients prior to the visit, immediately after the visit, and 1 month after the visit to determine the impact of the visit on their knowledge.


      Twenty-three of 423 patients (5.4%) who had a visit did not proceed to the screening CT scan. One hundred twenty-five consecutive patients completed the initial survey, 122 completed the postvisit survey, and 113 completed the 1-month follow-up survey. Prior to the visit, the patients had a poor level of understanding about the age and smoking eligibility criteria (8.8% and 13.6% correct, respectively) and the benefits and harms of screening (55.2% and 38.4% correct, respectively). There was a significant improvement in knowledge noted after the visit for all questions (P = .03 to P < .0001). Knowledge waned by the 1-month follow-up but remained higher than it was before the visit.


      A centralized counseling and shared decision-making visit impacts the patient's knowledge about the eligibility criteria, benefits, and harms of lung cancer screening with LDCT, helping patients make value-based decisions.

      Key Words


      EMR (electronic medical record), LDCT (low-dose CT)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      Subscribe to CHEST
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Bach P.B.
        • Mirkin J.N.
        • Oliver T.K.
        • et al.
        Benefits and harmss of CT screening for lung cancer: a systematic review.
        JAMA. 2012; 307: 2418-2429
        • Wender R.
        • Fontham E.T.H.
        • Barrera E.
        • et al.
        American Cancer Society lung cancer screening guidelines.
        CA Cancer J Clin. 2013; 63: 106-117
        • Detterbeck F.C.
        • Mazzone P.J.
        • Naidich D.F.
        • Bach P.B.
        Screening for lung cancer. Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines.
        Chest. 2013; 143: e78S-e92S
      1. Providing Guidance on Lung Cancer Screening to Patients and Physicians: An Update from the American Lung Association Lung Cancer Screening Committee April 30, 2015. Accessed July 13, 2016.

        • Moyer V.A.
        US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for lung cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.
        Ann Intern Med. 2014; 160: 330-338
        • Mazzone P.
        • Powell C.A.
        • Arenberg D.
        • et al.
        Components necessary for high-quality lung cancer screening: American College of Chest Physicians and American Thoracic Society Policy Statement.
        Chest. 2015; 147: 295-303
      2. Informed Medical Decisions Foundation. Why shared decision making? Accessed July 13, 2016.

        • Volk R.J.
        • Llewellyn-Thomas H.
        • Stacey D.
        • Bwyn G.
        Ten years of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards Collaboration: evolution of the core dimensions for assessing the quality of patient decision aids.
        BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013; 13: S1
      3. Decision Memo for Screening for Lung Cancer with Low Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT) (CAG-004394). Accessed July 13, 2016.

        • Dunnigan K.
        Tests of marginal homogeneity and special cases.
        Pharms Stat. 2013; 12: 213-216
        • Hoffman R.M.
        • Lewis C.L.
        • Pignone M.
        • et al.
        Decision-making processes for breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer screening: results from the DECISIONS study.
        Med Decis Making. 2010; 30: 53S-64S
        • Tanner N.T.
        • Gebregziabher M.
        • Halbert C.H.
        • Payne E.
        • Egede L.E.
        • Silverstri G.A.
        Racial differences in outcomes within the National Lung Screening Trial. Implications for widespread implementation.
        Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015; 192: 200-208
        • Silvestri G.A.
        • Nietert P.J.
        • Zoller J.
        • Carter C.
        • Bradford D.
        Attitudes towards screening for lung cancer among smokers and their non-smoking counterparts.
        Thorax. 2007; 62: 126-130
        • Dominioni L.
        • Rotolo N.
        • Poli A.
        • et al.
        Self-selection effects in smokers attending lung cancer screening: a 9.5-year population-based cohort study in Varese, Italy.
        J Thorac Oncol. 2010; 5: 428-435
        • Pinsky P.F.
        • Church T.R.
        • Izmirlian G.
        • Kramer B.S.
        The National Lung Screening Trial: results stratified by demographics, smoking history, and lung cancer histology.
        Cancer. 2013; 119: 3976-3983
        • Aberle D.R.
        • Adams A.M.
        • Berg C.D.
        • et al.
        Baseline characteristics of participants in the randomized National Lung Screening Trial.
        J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010; 102: 1771-1779
        • Howard D.H.
        • Richards T.B.
        • Bach P.B.
        • Kegler M.C.
        • Berg C.J.
        Comorbidities, smoking status, and life expectancy among individuals eligible for lung cancer screening.
        Cancer. 2015; 121: 4341-4347
        • Golden S.E.
        • Wiener R.S.
        • Sullivan D.
        • Ganzini L.
        • Slatore C.G.
        Primary care providers and a system problem. A qualitative study of clinicians caring for patients with incidental pulmonary nodules.
        Chest. 2015; 148: 1422-1429
        • Iaccarino J.M.
        • Clark J.
        • Bolton R.
        • et al.
        A national survey of pulmonologists’ views on low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer.
        Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2015; 12: 1667-1675
        • Wiener R.S.
        • Slatore C.G.
        • Gillespie C.
        • Clark J.A.
        Pulmonologists’ reported use of guidelines and shared decision-making in evaluation of pulmonary nodules. A qualitative study.
        Chest. 2015; 148: 1415-1421
        • Edwards A.G.K.
        • Naik G.
        • Ahmed H.
        • et al.
        Personalised risk communication for informed decision making about taking screening tests.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; 2: CD001865
        • Smith S.K.
        • Trevena L.
        • Simpson J.M.
        • Barratt A.
        • Nutbeam D.
        • McCaffery K.J.
        A decision aid to support informed choices about bowel cancer screening among adults with low education: randomized controlled trial.
        BMJ. 2010; 341: c5370
        • Yousaf-Khan U.
        • Horeweg N.
        • van der Aalst C.
        • ten Haaf K.
        • Oudkerk M.
        • de Koning H.
        Baseline characteristics and mortality outcomes of control group participants and eligible non-responders in the NELSON lung cancer screening study.
        J Thorac Oncol. 2015; 10: 747-753