Facilitators and Barriers to Lung Cancer Screening during Long COVID: A Global Systematic Review and Meta-Study Synthesis of Qualitative Research

Teferi Gebru Gebremeskel (), Frank Romeo, Adisu Tafari Shama, Billie Bonevski and Joshua Trigg
Additional contact information
Teferi Gebru Gebremeskel: Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute (FHMRI), College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, P.O. Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
Frank Romeo: S.H.R.O SBARRO Organization, College of Science and Technology, Temple University, RM 00196 Roma, Italy
Adisu Tafari Shama: Department of Public Health, Health Institute, Wollega University, Nekemte P.O. Box 395, Wollega, Ethiopia
Billie Bonevski: Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute (FHMRI), College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, P.O. Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia
Joshua Trigg: Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute (FHMRI), College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, P.O. Box 2100, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia

IJERPH, 2024, vol. 21, issue 5, 1-13

Abstract: Background : Participation in targeted screening reduces lung cancer mortality by 30–60%, but screening is not universally available. Therefore, the study aimed to synthesize the evidence and identify facilitators and barriers to lung cancer screening participation globally. Methods : Two reviewers screened primary studies using qualitative methods published up to February 2023. We used two-phase synthesis consistent with a meta-study methodology to create an interpretation of lung cancer screening decisions grounded in primary studies, carried out a thematic analysis of group themes as specific facilitators and barriers, systematically compared investigations for similarities and differences, and performed meta-synthesis to generate an expanded theory of lung cancer screening participation. We used the Social Ecological Model to organize and interpret the themes: individual, interpersonal, social/cultural, and organizational/structural levels. Results : Fifty-two articles met the final inclusion criteria. Themes identified as facilitating lung cancer screening included prioritizing patient education, quality of communication, and quality of provider-initiated encounter/coordination of care (individual patient and provider level), quality of the patient–provider relationship (interpersonal group), perception of a life’s value and purpose (cultural status), quality of tools designed, and care coordination (and organizational level). Themes coded as barriers included low awareness, fear of cancer diagnosis, low perceived benefit, high perceived risk of low-dose computerized tomography, concern about cancer itself, practical obstacle, futility, stigma, lack of family support, COVID-19 fear, disruptions in cancer care due to COVID-19, inadequate knowledge of care providers, shared decision, and inadequate time (individual level), patient misunderstanding, poor rapport, provider recommendation, lack of established relationship, and confusing decision aid tools (interpersonal group), distrust in the service, fatalistic beliefs, and perception of aging (cultural level), and lack of institutional policy, lack of care coordinators, inadequate infrastructure, absence of insurance coverage, and costs (and organizational status). Conclusions : This study identified critical barriers, facilitators, and implications to lung cancer screening participation. Therefore, we employed strategies for a new digital medicine (artificial intelligence) screening method to balance the cost–benefit, “workdays” lost in case of disease, and family hardship, which is essential to improve lung cancer screening uptake.

Keywords: facilitators; barriers; lung cancer; screening; long COVID; worldwide (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/5/534/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/21/5/534/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:21:y:2024:i:5:p:534-:d:1382870

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().