Search

Background: Recently, lung cancer screenings based on age and smoking history using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) have begun in Korea. This study aimed to evaluate the distribution of lung imaging reporting and data system (Lung-RADS) categories in shipyard workers exposed to lung carcinogens such as nickel, chromium, and welding fumes according to job type, to provide basic data regarding indications for LDCT in shipyard workers., Methods: This study included 6,326 workers from a single shipyard, who underwent health examinations with LDCT between January 2010 and December 2018. Data on age, smoking status and history, medical history, and job type were investigated. The participants were categorized into high-exposure, low-exposure, and non-exposure job groups based on the estimated exposure level of nickel, chromium, and welding fumes according to job type. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to determine the difference between exposure groups in Lung-RADS category ≥ 3 (3, 4A, and 4B)., Results: Out of all participants, 97 (1.5%) participants were classified into Lung-RADS category ≥ 3 and 7 (0.1%) participants were confirmed as lung cancer. The positive predictive value (ratio of diagnosed lung cancer cases to Lung-RADS category ≥ 3) was 7.2%. The hazard ratio (HR) of Lung-RADS category ≥ 3 was 1.451 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.911-2.309) in low-exposure and 1.692 (95% CI: 1.007-2.843) in high-exposure job group. Adjusting for age and pack-years, the HR was statistically significant only in the high-exposure job group (HR: 1.689; 95% CI: 1.004-2.841)., Conclusions: Based on LDCT and Lung-RADS, among male shipyard workers, Lung-RADS category ≥ 3 were significantly higher in the high-exposure job group. Their HR tended to be > 1.0 and was statistically significant in the high-exposure job group. Additional studies should be conducted to establish more elaborate LDCT indications for occupational health examination., Competing Interests: Competing interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Korean Society of Occupational & Environmental Medicine.)

Background: On the basis of the results of the National Lung Screening Trial, the US Preventive Services Task Force now recommends yearly low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer screening among high-risk individuals. There is limited information regarding physician attitudes toward LDCT screening and whether these vary according to provider specialty., Materials and Methods: Primary care providers (PCPs) and specialists were surveyed about their knowledge and attitudes toward lung cancer screening and likelihood to order an LDCT screening. Descriptive and univariate analyses were used to assess differences between PCPs versus specialists., Results: Of the 103 respondents 69% were PCPs, 45% were attending-level physicians, 42% were male, and most (51%) worked in mixed outpatient/inpatient practice settings. Compared with specialists, PCPs were less likely to feel confident in their ability to identify appropriate patients for lung cancer screening (63.8% vs. 93.5%; P < .01) or to decide the workup of patients with positive LDCT findings (52.9% vs. 93.5%; P < .01). PCPs were also less likely to believe that the recommended yearly screening interval is feasible (27.5% vs. 86.7%; P < .01), to feel comfortable counseling patients on LDCT (51.4% vs. 82.8%; P = .01) or have sufficient time for counseling (14.3% vs. 50%; P < .01). Despite these differences, PCPs were equally as likely as specialists to recommend LDCT for their high-risk smokers., Conclusion: Despite feeling less confident and knowledgeable about lung cancer screening, PCPs are as likely as specialists to recommend LDCT screening. However, PCPs need further education to ensure the success of lung cancer screening programs., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)