Cargando…
Motivation is not enough: A qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in Australia to inform future implementation
INTRODUCTION: Participation in lung cancer screening (LCS) trials and real-world programs is low, with many people at high-risk for lung cancer opting out of baseline screening after registering interest. We aimed to identify the potential drivers of participation in LCS in the Australian setting, t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9524683/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36178960 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275361 |
_version_ | 1784800547403988992 |
---|---|
author | Dunlop, Kate L. A. Marshall, Henry M. Stone, Emily Sharman, Ashleigh R. Dodd, Rachael H. Rhee, Joel J. McCullough, Sue Rankin, Nicole M. |
author_facet | Dunlop, Kate L. A. Marshall, Henry M. Stone, Emily Sharman, Ashleigh R. Dodd, Rachael H. Rhee, Joel J. McCullough, Sue Rankin, Nicole M. |
author_sort | Dunlop, Kate L. A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Participation in lung cancer screening (LCS) trials and real-world programs is low, with many people at high-risk for lung cancer opting out of baseline screening after registering interest. We aimed to identify the potential drivers of participation in LCS in the Australian setting, to inform future implementation. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with individuals at high-risk of lung cancer who were eligible for screening and who had either participated (‘screeners’) or declined to participate (‘decliners’) in the International Lung Screening Trial from two Australian sites. Interview guide development was informed by the Precaution Adoption Process Model. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using the COM-B model of behaviour to explore capability, opportunity and motivation related to screening behaviour. RESULTS: Thirty-nine participants were interviewed (25 screeners; 14 decliners). Motivation to participate in screening was high in both groups driven by the lived experience of lung cancer and a belief that screening is valuable, however decliners unlike their screening counterparts reported low self-efficacy. Decliners in our study reported challenges in capability including ability to attend and in knowledge and understanding. Decliners also reported challenges related to physical and social opportunity, in particular location as a barrier and lack of family support to attend screening. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that motivation alone may not be sufficient to change behaviour related to screening participation, unless capability and opportunity are also considered. Focusing strategies on barriers related to capability and opportunity such as online/telephone support, mobile screening programs and financial assistance for screeners may better enhance screening participation. Providing funding for clinicians to support individuals in decision-making and belief in self-efficacy may foster motivation. Targeting interventions that connect eligible individuals with the LCS program will be crucial for successful implementation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9524683 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95246832022-10-01 Motivation is not enough: A qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in Australia to inform future implementation Dunlop, Kate L. A. Marshall, Henry M. Stone, Emily Sharman, Ashleigh R. Dodd, Rachael H. Rhee, Joel J. McCullough, Sue Rankin, Nicole M. PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: Participation in lung cancer screening (LCS) trials and real-world programs is low, with many people at high-risk for lung cancer opting out of baseline screening after registering interest. We aimed to identify the potential drivers of participation in LCS in the Australian setting, to inform future implementation. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with individuals at high-risk of lung cancer who were eligible for screening and who had either participated (‘screeners’) or declined to participate (‘decliners’) in the International Lung Screening Trial from two Australian sites. Interview guide development was informed by the Precaution Adoption Process Model. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed using the COM-B model of behaviour to explore capability, opportunity and motivation related to screening behaviour. RESULTS: Thirty-nine participants were interviewed (25 screeners; 14 decliners). Motivation to participate in screening was high in both groups driven by the lived experience of lung cancer and a belief that screening is valuable, however decliners unlike their screening counterparts reported low self-efficacy. Decliners in our study reported challenges in capability including ability to attend and in knowledge and understanding. Decliners also reported challenges related to physical and social opportunity, in particular location as a barrier and lack of family support to attend screening. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that motivation alone may not be sufficient to change behaviour related to screening participation, unless capability and opportunity are also considered. Focusing strategies on barriers related to capability and opportunity such as online/telephone support, mobile screening programs and financial assistance for screeners may better enhance screening participation. Providing funding for clinicians to support individuals in decision-making and belief in self-efficacy may foster motivation. Targeting interventions that connect eligible individuals with the LCS program will be crucial for successful implementation. Public Library of Science 2022-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9524683/ /pubmed/36178960 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275361 Text en © 2022 Dunlop et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Dunlop, Kate L. A. Marshall, Henry M. Stone, Emily Sharman, Ashleigh R. Dodd, Rachael H. Rhee, Joel J. McCullough, Sue Rankin, Nicole M. Motivation is not enough: A qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in Australia to inform future implementation |
title | Motivation is not enough: A qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in Australia to inform future implementation |
title_full | Motivation is not enough: A qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in Australia to inform future implementation |
title_fullStr | Motivation is not enough: A qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in Australia to inform future implementation |
title_full_unstemmed | Motivation is not enough: A qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in Australia to inform future implementation |
title_short | Motivation is not enough: A qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in Australia to inform future implementation |
title_sort | motivation is not enough: a qualitative study of lung cancer screening uptake in australia to inform future implementation |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9524683/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36178960 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0275361 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dunlopkatela motivationisnotenoughaqualitativestudyoflungcancerscreeninguptakeinaustraliatoinformfutureimplementation AT marshallhenrym motivationisnotenoughaqualitativestudyoflungcancerscreeninguptakeinaustraliatoinformfutureimplementation AT stoneemily motivationisnotenoughaqualitativestudyoflungcancerscreeninguptakeinaustraliatoinformfutureimplementation AT sharmanashleighr motivationisnotenoughaqualitativestudyoflungcancerscreeninguptakeinaustraliatoinformfutureimplementation AT doddrachaelh motivationisnotenoughaqualitativestudyoflungcancerscreeninguptakeinaustraliatoinformfutureimplementation AT rheejoelj motivationisnotenoughaqualitativestudyoflungcancerscreeninguptakeinaustraliatoinformfutureimplementation AT mcculloughsue motivationisnotenoughaqualitativestudyoflungcancerscreeninguptakeinaustraliatoinformfutureimplementation AT rankinnicolem motivationisnotenoughaqualitativestudyoflungcancerscreeninguptakeinaustraliatoinformfutureimplementation |