Search

Background Survivors of lung cancer and their partners often have complex unresolved physical, psychosocial, and behavioral needs that can negatively affect the survivors’ and partners’ well-being. This systematic review aimed to (1) examine the content and delivery of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) and (2) summarize and synthesize the current evidence for effectiveness of MBIs targeting survivors of lung cancer and/or one selected partner (dyads). Method Six databases were searched for interventional studies published in English between 1980 and June 2020 using three terms (lung neoplasms, mindfulness, caregivers). For outcome measures, the interventions focused on behavioral change (meditation, yoga, stretching, breathing), symptom management (dyspnea, fatigue, sleep disruption, anxiety, depression, stress reduction), and knowledge. Two reviewers independently assessed article eligibility. One reviewer performed and another independently verified data extraction. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials was used to critically appraise RCTs. Results Searching yielded 307 records, of which 64 were assessed for eligibility. Six studies investigated the impact of an MBI on survivors and partners. Four studies were single-arm feasibility studies; two were RCTs. Two feasibility studies and one RCT recruited romantic couples whereas the others recruited asymmetrical dyads. The single-arm studies reported strong feasibility and acceptability. RCTs reported significant outcomes for reduced cancer-related distress and depression, and improved QOL, self-compassion, mindfulness skills, and rumination. Conclusion Dyadic intervention research is a growing field. Few interventions target individuals with lung cancer and their partners. No interventions target partners alone. Future research should evaluate rigorous methodologies that enhance the understanding of independent and interdependent health-related effects within dyads and across relationships and settings.

Purpose:To explore attitudes and acceptance (i.e., intent for future adoption) of survivors of lung cancer and their family members toward a dyad-focused mHealth mindfulness-based intervention (MBI).Approach:Focus groups.Setting:Community hospital setting in South Carolina.Participants:Survivors n = 11 (M = 64.6 years; 73% female; 64% African American) of non-small cell lung cancer (stage I-IIIa) and their family members, n = 8 (M = 58.6 years; 38% female; 75% African American).Intervention:A fully functional prototype mHealth app to deliver a tailored MBI for survivors of lung cancer and their family members.Method:Semi-structured focus groups were conducted and assessed using thematic data analysis to identify the benefits, concerns, needs, and expectations of the app.Results:Convenience and health were the top benefits of using the app, while cost and difficulty of use were the top concerns. Survivors mentioned benefits more than their family members did. Participants felt positively about adding a community network to the app. Finally, participants expected to hear about Breathe Easier from their care provider.Conclusion:Participants perceived a benefit to having credible health information delivered through an mHealth app. Guidance and credible health information regarding lung cancer survivorship should be accessible and convenient for everyone impacted by the disease. Thus, future research should explore platforms for a virtual support system and understanding dissemination of mHealth apps through health care providers.

Purpose To explore receptivity of and preferences for risk-reducing health behavior changes among African American survivors of early-stage lung cancer and their family members. Participants & setting 26 African American non-small cell lung cancer survivor-family member dyads were recruited from two cancer programs in the southeastern United States. Methodologic approach Social cognitive theory principles guided the design and implementation of focus groups. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data, and thematic analysis was used to interpret the transcripts from the focus groups. Findings The following four themes were identified. Implications for nursing Participants emphasized the need for improved provider communication. Pragmatic communication interventions for providers, survivors, and family members may facilitate behavior change and improve outcomes among underserved populations.

Background: Symptom burden remains a critical concern for individuals with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) following the completion of treatment. The most common symptom clusters, dyspnea (shortness of breath) and fatigue,can contribute to physical decline, reductions in quality of life, and a higher risk of comorbidities and mortality. Dyspnea is a primary limiter of exercise capacity in individuals with lung cancer, resulting in exercise avoidance and an accelerated physical decline. As such, designing resistance training with cluster sets to mitigate symptoms of dyspnea and fatigue may result in improved exercise tolerance. Thus, maintainingthe exercise stimulus via cluster sets, combined with improved tolerance of the exercise, could result in maintenance of physical function and quality of life. The purpose of this study is to investigate the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a hybrid-delivery home-based cluster-set resistance training program in individuals with NSCLC. Methods: Individuals with NSCLC (n=15), within 12-months of completion of treatment will be recruited to participate in this single arm feasibility trial. Participants will complete 8-weeks of home-based resistance training designed to minimizedyspnea and fatigue. The hybrid-delivery of the program will include supervised sessions in the participants’ home, and virtual supervision via video conferencing. The primary outcome of feasibility will be quantifiedby recruitment rates, retention, acceptability, and intervention fidelity. Exploratory outcomes (dyspnea, fatigue, quality of life, physical function, and body composition) will be assessed pre- and post- intervention. Discussion: This study will provide important data on the feasibility of delivering this intervention and inform procedures for a future randomized controlled trial. Trial Registration: Record not yet public

Purpose To reduce lung cancer mortality, individuals at high risk should receive a low-dose computed tomography screening annually. To increase the likelihood of screening, interventions that promote shared decision-making are needed. The goal of this study was to investigate the feasibility, acceptability, usability, and preliminary effectiveness of a computer-based decision aid. Methods Thirty-three participants were recruited through primary-care clinics in a small southeastern-US city. Participants used a computer-based decision aid (“Is Lung Cancer Screening for You?”) during a clinic appointment. Paper surveys collected self-reported feasibility, acceptability, and usability data. A research coordinator was present to observe each patient’s and health-care provider’s interactions, and to assess the fidelity of shared decision-making. Results The decision aid was feasible, acceptable for use in a clinic setting, and easy for participants to use. Patients had low decisional conflict following use of the decision aid and had high screening intention and actual screening rates. Shared decision-making discussions using the decision aid were nearly 6 minutes on average. Conclusion Computer-based decision aids are feasible for promoting shared lung cancer–screening decisions. A more robust study is warranted to measure the added value of a computer-based version of this aid versus a paper-based aid.

To systematically review the evidence regarding rehabilitation interventions targeting optimal physical or cognitive function in adults with a history of cancer and describe the breadth of evidence as well as strengths and limitations across a range of functional domains.PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Plus, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase. The time scope was January 2008 to April 2019.Prospective, controlled trials including single- and multiarm cohorts investigating rehabilitative interventions for cancer survivors at any point in the continuum of care were included, if studies included a primary functional outcome measure. Secondary data analyses and pilot/feasibility studies were excluded. Full-text review identified 362 studies for inclusion.Extraction was performed by coauthor teams and quality and bias assessed using the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) Classification of Evidence Scheme (class I-IV).Studies for which the functional primary endpoint achieved significance were categorized into 9 functional areas foundational to cancer rehabilitation: (1) quality of life (109 studies), (2) activities of daily living (61 studies), (3) fatigue (59 studies), (4) functional mobility (55 studies), (5) exercise behavior (37 studies), (6) cognition (20 studies), (7) communication (10 studies), (8) sexual function (6 studies), and (9) return to work (5 studies). Most studies were categorized as class III in quality/bias. Averaging results found within each of the functional domains, 71% of studies reported statistically significant results after cancer rehabilitation intervention(s) for at least 1 functional outcome.These findings provide evidence supporting the efficacy of rehabilitative interventions for individuals with a cancer history. The findings should be balanced with the understanding that many studies had moderate risk of bias and/or limitations in study quality by AAN criteria. These results may provide a foundation for future work to establish clinical practice guidelines for rehabilitative interventions across cancer disease types.

Background and purpose Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is expected to increase early detection of lung cancer and improve survival. The growth in the number of advanced nurse practitioners (NPs) in primary care settings increases the likelihood that an NP will serve as a patient's provider. This study's purpose was to examine knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding LDCT among NPs who work in primary care settings. Methods An explanatory, sequential, mixed-method design used a 32-item questionnaire, followed by a semi-structured telephone interview. The development of the survey and interview questions were guided by a conceptual framework representing a temporal sequence for behavior change and potential barriers to guideline adherence. Conclusions Nurse practitioners believe that shared decision making with their high-risk patients about LDCT is within their scope of their practice. Working in time-constrained primary care settings, NPs have limited abilities to improve the uptake of LDCT. Substantial patient barriers exist that deter follow through on providers' recommendation. Disseminating guidelines and authorizing health insurance reimbursement is insufficient. Implications for practice Research is needed that investigates the screening process so that barriers can be closely studied. Culture change is needed where early detection has greater value for insurers, providers, and patients.

Background The global COVID-19 pandemic has brought numerous challenges for conducting the human subjects research needed to advance science and improve health. Objectives The purpose of this article is to discuss how a college of nursing at a large public university in the southeast United States has responded to the challenges of conducting research during the novel COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Seven faculty researchers at the University of South Carolina College of Nursing share their experiences in overcoming the unique challenges of conducting research because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Strategies to overcome the challenges posed by COVID-19 are presented within the context of the research process, career implications, communication, and maintaining morale. Results Fears of COVID-19 and social distancing measures have hindered participant recruitment, enrollment, and involvement in ongoing studies. Increasing virtual technology use and enhancing safety precautions have assisted researchers to overcome barriers. Scholarly writing has increased for some faculty members whose studies have been stalled by the pandemic, yet others have seen a decline because of additional personal responsibilities. The careers of faculty members across all ranks have been uniquely affected by the pandemic. With most faculty working remotely, enhanced communication strategies at the university and college have supported the research enterprise. Morale has been adversely affected, but a variety of personal and collegial efforts have helped faculty cope and preserve a sense of normalcy during this devastating pandemic. Discussion Faculty and their ability to conduct the research needed to inform clinical and public health practice have been adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the challenges of conducting research during this unprecedented crisis, faculty and institutions are taking novel steps to ensure the continuity of scientific progress for improving the health and well-being of patients and populations.

Purpose To evaluate the cultural sensitivity of the Breathe Easier mobile health application for African American lung cancer survivors and their families. Breathe Easier is an intervention designed to teach strategies to combat symptoms related to lung cancer. Participants & setting 12 African American lung cancer survivors and their family members were recruited from an American College of Surgeons-approved cancer program in South Carolina. Methodologic approach Participants completed in-depth interviews, which were guided by the Cultural Sensitivity Assessment Tool and the Cultural Sensitivity Checklist. Two researchers performed open and axial coding to conceptually organize the data. Findings Multiple culturally relevant themes emerged, including benefits, concerns, and suggestions related to content literacy and inclusiveness, as well as acceptability of and motivations for using the mobile application. However, lung cancer survivors and their family members reported being more concerned about accessing accurate survivorship information. Implications for nursing Attention to health literacy, eHealth literacy, and cultural sensitivity may enhance patient outcomes, and nurses can advocate for patients regarding these communication issues.

Supplemental material, eTable-supplement_Sample_Protocol for A Prospective Pilot Study Evaluating Feasibility and Preliminary Effects of Breathe Easier: A Mindfulness-based Intervention for Survivors of Lung Cancer and Their Family Members (Dyads) by Karen Kane McDonnell, David G. Gallerani, Brandi R. Newsome, Otis L. Owens, Jenay Beer, Amanda R. Myren-Bennett, Elizabeth Regan, James W. Hardin and Lisa A. Webb in Integrative Cancer Therapies

Soon after the National Lung Screening Trial, organizations began to endorse low-dose computed tomography (LCDT) screening for lung cancer in high-risk patients. Concerns about the risks versus benefits of screening, as well as the logistics of identifying and referring eligible patients, remained among physicians. This study aimed to examine primary care physicians' knowledge, attitudes, referral practices, and associated barriers regarding LDCT screening. We administered a national survey of primary care physicians in the United States between September 2016 and April 2017. Physicians received up to 3 mailings, 1 follow-up email, and received varying incentives to complete the survey. Overall, 293 physicians participated, for a response rate of 13%. We used weighted descriptive statistics to characterize participants and their responses. Over half of the respondents correctly reported that the US Preventive Services Task Force recommends LDCT screening for high-risk patients. Screening recommendations for patients not meeting high-risk criteria varied. Although 75% agreed that the benefits of LDCT screening outweigh the risks, fewer agreed that there is substantial evidence that screening reduces mortality (50%). The most commonly reported barriers to ordering screening included prior authorization requirements (57%), lack of insurance coverage (53%), and coverage denials (31%). The most frequently cited barrier to conducting LDCT screening shared decision making was patients' competing health priorities (42%). Given the impact of physician recommendations on cancer screening utilization, further understanding of physicians' LDCT screening attitudes and shared decision-making practices is needed. Clinical practice and policy changes are also needed to engage more patients in screening discussions., Highlights • Most physicians had five or less lung cancer screening referrals in the past year • Recommendation strategies varied, but often aligned with USPSTF or NCCN guidelines • Physicians were uncertain about the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of screening • Insurance coverage and costs were commonly cited as barriers to screening referral • A common barrier to performing SDM was patients' competing health priorities

Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the most common smoking-related illness. COPD often is underemphasized as a comorbidity except when considering issues surrounding surgical treatment options. Objectives This article aims to provide nurses with an overview of the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment implications of COPD. Methods Definitions, differentials, and treatment considerations are provided, and clinical implications and resources are described. Findings The added burden of dyspnea, fatigue, and psychological distress related to COPD may affect the overall outcome and quality of life (QOL) of patients with lung cancer. Attention to the prevention, assessment, and treatment of lung cancer and COPD and related symptomatology will help maximize patients' QOL.

Research using mHealth apps has the potential to positively impact health care management and outcomes. However, choosing an appropriate mHealth app may be challenging for the health researcher. The author team used existing evaluation tools, checklists, and guidelines to assess selected mHealth apps to identify strengths, challenges, and potential gaps within existing evaluation tools. They identified specific evaluation tool components, questions, and items most effective in examining app content, usability, and features, including literacy demand and cultural appropriateness; technical information; practical aspects of app functionality; and evolving capabilities of mobile medical apps. Challenges included the subjective nature of the results, time required to complete the evaluation, lack of emphasis on evidence-based content, and inadequate tool flexibility. Health researchers considering the integration of mobile apps into research will benefit from evaluation tools that assess both evidence-based content and the ability of the mobile app to securely integrate with other digital technologies involved in patient care. Next steps will include the involvement of health care providers and professionals, including nurses a wide range of expertise, to develop an mHealth evaluation tool that focuses on identifying quality, evidence-based mobile apps into patient outcomes research.

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION Lung cancer survivors face many challenges that affect their quality of life and survival. A growing concern is the layered effect of stigma related to cigarette smoking and the perceived life-threatening diagnosis of lung cancer. This experience may affect lung cancer survivors' physical, psychological, and social well-being, negatively influencing their quality of life. LITERATURE SEARCH CINAHL®, PubMed®, PsycINFO®, and Web of Science were searched from January 2000 through August 2017, using combinations of four keywords. DATA EVALUATION Extracted data included research aims, design, method, analytical approach, sample size, gender, ethnicity/race, setting, stigma measure, smoking status, and major results. SYNTHESIS Of 163 studies initially identified, 30 (19 quantitative, 8 qualitative, 2 theoretical reviews, and 1 mixed method) were included. Quantitative studies were analyzed by statistical significance and relevant findings. Thematic analysis was used to evaluate qualitative studies. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH Future research should focus on the development and testing of tailored and multilevel interventions to support the management of stigma and lessen the negative impact it has on quality of life, with special considerations for vulnerable subpopulations.

BACKGROUND The results of the National Lung Screening Trial showed a 20% reduction in lung cancer mortality and a 6.7% reduction in all-cause mortality when high-risk patients were screened with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) versus chest x-ray (CXR). The US Preventive Services Task Force has issued a grade B recommendation for LDCT screening, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and private insurers now cover the screening cost under certain conditions. The purpose of this study was to assess the knowledge of, attitudes toward, and use of LDCT screening for lung cancer among family physicians. METHODS A 32-item questionnaire was distributed to members of the South Carolina Academy of Family Physicians in 2015. Descriptive statistics were calculated. RESULTS There were 101 respondents, and most had incorrect knowledge about which organizations recommended screening. Many physicians continued to recommend CXR for lung cancer screening. Most felt that LDCT screening increased the odds of detecting disease at earlier stages (98%) and that the benefits outweighed the harms (75%). Concerns included unnecessary procedures (88%), stress/anxiety (52%), and radiation exposure (50%). Most physicians discussed the risks/benefits of screening with their patients in some capacity (76%); however, more than 50% reported making 1 or no screening recommendations in the past year. CONCLUSIONS Most family physicians report discussing LDCT with patients at high risk for lung cancer; however, referrals remain low. There are gaps in physician knowledge about screening guidelines and reimbursement, and this indicates a need for further educational outreach. The development of decision aids may facilitate shared decision-making discussions about screening, and targeted interventions may improve knowledge gaps. Cancer 2016;122:2324–2331. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Background One of the largest, most expensive randomized, controlled trials, the National Lung Screening Trial, found that annual low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) scans led to a 20% reduction in lung cancer deaths. Objectives This study describes the characteristics and program implementation barriers experienced by LDCT screening programs in the United States. Methods Using a mixed-methods approach, Lung Cancer Alliance Screening Centers of Excellence were surveyed and interviewed in 2013. Representatives from 65 centers completed an electronic questionnaire, followed by in-depth interviews with 13 physicians and nurse navigators regarding their institution's screening programs. Findings Participants cited low patient demand and few physician referrals as barriers, but few centers reported needing additional staff or equipment. Those interviewed discussed the importance of a multidisciplinary team and overcoming barriers related to insurance reimbursement, costs, and physician knowledge to improve program implementation.

Purpose Behavioral interventions targeting cancer survivors often fail to address the clustering of unhealthy behaviors among family members and friends, and the impact of close relationships on behavior change. The study's aim was to identify factors associated with receptivity and preferences for lifestyle behavior change among family members of African-American survivors of lung cancer. Methods Principles of social cognitive theory guided the design. A descriptive, qualitative study recruited 26 African-American family members of lung cancer survivors from two teaching hospitals in the southeastern United States. A 20-item Information Form collected demographic, health status, and health behavior information. Family members participated in one of three semi-structured focus group discussions. Results Four major themes emerged: family members and survivors both resisted the caregiver role; dramatic changes evoked by the diagnosis of lung cancer were facilitators and barriers to lifestyle choices; leaning on faith was the primary source of support; and these families live with a constant threat of multiple cancers. Findings emphasize the importance of meaningful conversations among health-care providers, survivors, and family members during the time of diagnosis, treatment, and recovery, so that family members are better prepared to cope with anticipated changes. Conclusions This study highlights the stressors that affect family members and sheds light on their unique needs. The stressors limit their ability to change health behaviors. Family members need basic education, skills training, and support related to the lung cancer diagnosis and other cancers. Current methods to provide these services are limited in their accessibility, availability, and effectiveness.

BackgroundUp to 70% of lung cancer survivors are affected by chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a common, debilitating, comorbid disease. Lung cancer and COPD are both characterized by symptoms such as breathlessness, fatigue, and psychological distress. These distressing chronic symptoms are exacerbated by stress and detract from an individual’s quality of life. ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to identify and evaluate evidence-based, commercially available apps for promoting mindfulness-based strategies among adults with a COPD or lung cancer history (ie, chronic lung disease). MethodsFor this review, an interdisciplinary research team used 19 keyword combinations in the search engines of Google and iOS app stores in May 2017. Evaluations were conducted on the apps’ (1) content, (2) usability heuristics, (3) grade-level readability, and (4) cultural sensitivity. ResultsThe search resulted in 768 apps (508 in iOS and 260 in Google stores). A total of 9 apps met the inclusion criteria and received further evaluation. Only 1 app had below an eighth-grade reading level; the ninth one did not have enough text to calculate a readability score. None of the 9 apps met the cultural sensitivity evaluation criteria. ConclusionsThis systematic review identified critical design flaws that may affect the ease of using the apps in this study. Few mobile apps promote mindfulness-based strategies among adults with chronic lung disease (ie, COPD or lung cancer or both), but those that exist, overall, do not meet the latest scientific evidence. Recommendations include more stringent regulation of health-related apps, use of evidence-based frameworks and participatory design processes, following evidence-based usability practices, use of culturally sensitive language and images, and ensuring that content is written in plain language.

Background Cancer screening-related decisions require patients to evaluate complex medical information in short time frames, often with primary care providers (PCPs) they do not know. PCPs play an essential role in facilitating comprehensive shared decision making (SDM). Objective To develop and test a decision aid (DA) and SDM strategy for PCPs and high-risk patients. Design The DA was tested with 20 dyads. Each dyad consisted of one PCP and one patient eligible for screening. A prospective, one-group, mixed-method study design measured fidelity, patient values, screening intention, acceptability and satisfaction. Results Four PCPs and 20 patients were recruited from an urban academic medical centre. Most patients were female (n = 14, 70%), most had completed high school (n = 15, 75%), and their average age was 65 years old. Half were African American. Patients and PCPs rated the DA as helpful, easy to read and use and acceptable in terms of time frame (observed t = 11.6 minutes, SD 2.7). Most patients (n = 16, 80%) indicated their intent to be screened. PCPs recommended screening for most patients (n = 17, 85%). Conclusions Evidence supports the value of lung cancer screening with LDCT for select high-risk patients. Guidelines endorse engaging patients and their PCPs in SDM discussions. Our findings suggest that using a brief, interactive, plain-language, culturally sensitive, theory-based DA and SDM strategy is feasible, acceptable and may be essential to effectively translate and sustain the adoption of LDCT screening recommendations into the clinic setting.