Lisa Carter-Harris

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/1805/14108

The decision to screen for lung cancer is difficult. Lung cancer screening can reduce lung cancer mortality in high-risk populations. Still, there are potential harms associated with lung cancer screening that includes false-positive results, over-diagnosis, radiation exposure, and incidental findings. The decision to screen for lung cancer is best made in the context of shared decision making, where clinicians and patients weigh the benefits and risks of screening and make informed decisions together. This critical patient-clinician communication is challenged by low levels of awareness about lung cancer screening among high-risk populations.

Dr. Lisa Carter-Harris and her team have developed LungTalk, a computer-tailored decision support tool, to help prepare high-risk patients to engage in a discussion about lung health and screening with their clinician, make a decision about lung cancer screening, and intervene with current smokers to consider cessation.

LungTalk is unique in that content is tailored by smoking status, and includes key information in the form of a tailored print-out to help the patient initiate this important conversation with their clinician. LungTalk also includes a cognitive embodiment game meant to increase negative perceptions toward cigarettes and smoking to promote cessation.

Dr. Carter-Harris’ work to improve patient-clinician communication and shared decision-making in the complex decision of lung cancer screening is another example of how IUPUI faculty are TRANSLATING RESEARCH INTO PRACTICE.

Browse

Now showing 1 - 10 of 22

Partnering to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening: Perspectives of Community Advisory Board Members
(Sage, 2021-10) Rawl, Susan M.; Bailey, Sandra; Cork, Beatrice; Fields, Matthew; Griffin, Thomas; Haunert, Laura; Kline, Judy; Krier, Connie; Lagunes, Juan; Lambert, Ruth L.; Malloy, Caeli; Quick, Jack; Shedd-Steele, Rivienne; Strom, Sylvia; Carter-Harris, Lisa; School of Nursing
The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) defines engagement in research as the meaningful involvement of patients, caregivers, clinicians, insurers, and others throughout the entire research process – from planning, to conducting the study, to disseminating study results. The purposes of this paper are to: 1) describe methods used to engage community members across the various phases of a PCORI-funded comparative effectiveness trial to increase colorectal cancer screening; and 2) report results of qualitative and quantitative evaluations of community advisory board members’ experiences on this project. Decisions to join and stay engaged with the study included feeling valued and appreciated, being compensated, the opportunity to contribute to research based on their skills and expertise, and being committed to colon cancer prevention efforts. Challenges identified by advisory board members included the significant time commitment, transportation, and meeting location. Lessons learned and guidance for researchers committed to patient and community engagement are described.
Lung cancer screening and stigma: Do smoking-related differences in perceived lung cancer stigma emerge prior to diagnosis?
(APA, 2021) Williamson, Timothy J.; Rawl, Susan M.; Kale, Minal S.; Carter-Harris, Lisa; School of Nursing
Background: Most lung cancer patients report experiencing stigma (i.e., devaluation based on one’s lung cancer diagnosis), which is associated with adverse health outcomes. Lung cancer is stigmatized due to its robust association with smoking and the perception of the disease as self inflicted. Purpose: Identifying sociodemographic and smoking-related correlates of perceived stigma among lung cancer screening-eligible adults (early in the cancer care trajectory) is needed to guide proactive psycho social interventions to reduce stigma and improve health for patients newly diagnosed with lung cancer. Methods: A national sample of lung cancer screening eligible adults (N = 515; 64.9% female) completed questionnaires on sociodemographic information, smoking-related characteristics, and perceived smoking-related lung cancer stigma. Zero-order and multivariate relationships between sociodemographic variables, smoking-related characteristics, and stigma were evaluated using Pearson’s correlations, t-tests, ANOVAs, and multivariable regression. Results: The multivariable regression demonstrated that younger age (b = -0.05, p = .047) was associated significantly with higher stigma. Additionally, women (b = 0.63, p = .015), participants who reported Hispanic/Latino ethnicity (b = 1.07, p = .049), and those with a college degree or higher (all p < .029) reported significantly higher stigma, compared to men, those who did not report Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, and other education categories, respectively. None of the smoking-related characteristics were associated significantly with perceived stigma (all p > .12). Conclusions: Sociodemographic variables (rather than smoking-related characteristics) significantly and uniquely differentiated lung cancer screening-eligible adults’ perception of lung cancer stigma. Smoking-related differences in lung cancer stigma may emerge following rather than prior to diagnosis.
Impact of smoke-free ordinance strength on smoking prevalence and lung cancer incidence
(PLOS, 2021-04-16) Nguyen, Ryan H.; Vater, Laura B.; Timsina, Lava R.; Durm, Gregory A.; Rupp, Katelin; Wright, Keylee; Spitznagle, Miranda H.; Paul, Brandy; Jalal, Shadia I.; Carter-Harris, Lisa; Hudmon, Karen S.; Hanna, Nasser H.; Loehrer, Patrick J.; Ceppa, DuyKhanh P.; Surgery, School of Medicine
Background: Smoke-free ordinances (SFO) have been shown to be effective public health interventions, but there is limited data on the impact SFO on lung cancer outcomes. We explored the effect of county-level SFO strength with smoking prevalence and lung cancer incidence in Indiana. Methods: We obtained county-level lung cancer incidence from the Indiana State Cancer Registry and county-level characteristics from the Indiana Tobacco Prevention and Cessation Commission's policy database between 1995 and 2016. Using generalized estimating equations, we performed multivariable analyses of smoking prevalence and age-adjusted lung cancer rates with respect to the strength of smoke-free ordinances at the county level over time. Results: Of Indiana's 92 counties, 24 had a SFO by 2011. In 2012, Indiana enacted a state-wide SFO enforcing at least moderate level SFO protection. Mean age-adjusted lung cancer incidence per year was 76.8 per 100,000 population and mean smoking prevalence per year was 25% during the study period. Counties with comprehensive or moderate SFO had a smoking prevalence 1.2% (95% CI [-1.88, -0.52]) lower compared with counties with weak or no SFO. Counties that had comprehensive or moderate SFO also had an 8.4 (95% CI [-11.5, -5.3]) decrease in new lung cancer diagnosis per 100,000 population per year compared with counties that had weak or no SFO. Conclusion: Counties with stronger smoke-free air ordinances were associated with decreased smoking prevalence and fewer new lung cancer cases per year. Strengthening SFO is paramount to decreasing lung cancer incidence.
Understanding the decision to screen for lung cancer or not: A qualitative analysis
(Wiley, 2019-12) Burke Draucker, Claire; Rawl, Susan M.; Vode, Emilee; Carter-Harris, Lisa; School of Nursing
Background Although new screening programmes with low‐dose computed tomography (LDCT) for lung cancer have been implemented throughout the United States, screening uptake remains low and screening‐eligible persons' decisions to screen or not remain poorly understood. Objective To describe how current and former long‐term smokers explain their decisions regarding participation in lung cancer screening. Design Phone interviews using a semi‐structured interview guide were conducted to ask screening‐eligible persons to describe their decisions regarding screening with LDCT. The interviews were transcribed and analysed with conventional content analytic techniques. Setting and participants A subsample of 40 participants (20 who had screened and 20 who had not) were drawn from the sample of a survey study whose participants were recruited by Facebook targeted advertisements. Results The sample was divided into the following five groups based on their decisions regarding lung cancer screening participation: Group 1: no intention to be screened, Group 2: no deliberate consideration but somewhat open to being screened, Group 3: deliberate consideration but no definitive decision to be screened, Group 4: intention to be screened and Group 5: had been screened. Reasons for screening participation decisions are described for each group. Across groups, data revealed that screening‐eligible persons have a number of misconceptions regarding LDCT, including that a scan is needed only if one is symptomatic or has not had a chest x‐ray. A physician recommendation was a key influence on decisions to screen. Discussion and conclusions Education initiatives aimed at providers and long‐term smokers regarding LDCT is needed. Quality patient/provider communication is most likely to improve screening rates.
Preparing Students for Success on Examinations: Readiness Assurance Tests in a Graduate-Level Statistics Course
(Healio, 2016-01) Bartlett Ellis, Rebecca J.; Carter-Harris, Lisa; MacLaughlin, Pam; School of Nursing
Formative feedback is one way to foster students' readiness for statistics examinations. The use of Readiness Assurance Tests was examined as an educational intervention in which feedback was provided for both correct and incorrect responses in a graduate-level statistics course. Examination scores in the intervention group ( n = 56) were compared with those in a control group ( n = 42). Intervention group examination scores significantly improved from 75.92 ± 14.52 on the Readiness Assurance Test to 90.06 ± 7.06, p < .001, on the midterm, and final examination scores improved from 78.23 ± 17.29 to 85.6 ± 6.98, p = .002. Intervention group midterm scores were significantly higher than those of the control group (90.06 ± 7.06 versus 79.7 ± 11.6, p < .001); however, no differences were found between the groups on the final examination (85.35 ± 9.46 versus 85.6 ± 6.98, p = .91). Use of Readiness Assurance Tests was an effective modality to increase student self-efficacy, learning experience, and, relative to a control group, midterm examination performance in statistics
A Randomized Trial to Compare a Tailored Web-Based Intervention and Tailored Phone Counseling to Usual Care for Increasing Colorectal Cancer Screening
(AACR, 2018-12) Champion, Victoria L.; Christy, Shannon M.; Rakowski, William; Gathirua- Mwangi, Wambui G.; Tarver, Will L.; Carter-Harris, Lisa; Cohee, Andrea A.; Marley, Andrew R.; Jessup, Nenette M.; Biederman, Erika; Kettler, Carla D.; Stump, Timothy E.; Monahan, Patrick; Lairson, David R.; Rawl, Susan M.; School of Nursing
Background: Colorectal cancer mortality could be decreased with risk-appropriate cancer screening. We examined the efficacy of three tailored interventions compared with usual care for increasing screening adherence. Methods: Women (n = 1,196) ages 51 to 74, from primary care networks and nonadherent to colorectal cancer guidelines, were randomized to (1) usual care, (2) tailored Web intervention, (3) tailored phone intervention, or (4) tailored Web + phone intervention. Average-risk women could select either stool test or colonoscopy, whereas women considered at higher than average risk received an intervention that supported colonoscopy. Outcome data were collected at 6 months by self-report, followed by medical record confirmation (attrition of 23%). Stage of change for colorectal cancer screening (precontemplation or contemplation) was assessed at baseline and 6 months. Results: The phone (41.7%, P < 0.0001) and combined Web + phone (35.8%, P < 0.001) interventions significantly increased colorectal cancer screening by stool test compared with usual care (11.1%), with ORs ranging from 5.4 to 6.8 in models adjusted for covariates. Colonoscopy completion did not differ between groups except that phone significantly increased colonoscopy completion compared with usual care for participants in the highest tertile of self-reported fear of cancer. Conclusions: A tailored phone with or without a Web component significantly increased colorectal cancer screening compared with usual care, primarily through stool testing, and phone significantly increased colonoscopy compared with usual care but only among those with the highest levels of baseline fear. Impact: This study supports tailored phone counseling with or without a Web program for increasing colorectal cancer screening in average-risk women.
Understanding lung cancer screening behavior: Racial, gender, and geographic differences among Indiana long-term smokers
(Elsevier, 2018-02-03) Carter-Harris, Lisa; Slaven, James E.; Monahan, Patrick O.; Shedd-Steele, Rivienne; Hanna, Nasser; Rawl, Susan M.; School of Nursing
Lung cancer screening is a relatively new screening option. Inequalities related to screening behavior have been documented in other types of cancer screening. Because stage at presentation drives mortality in lung cancer, it is critical to understand factors that influence screening behavior in lung cancer screening in order to intervene. However, we must first understand where disparities exist in lung cancer screening participation in order to effectively guide intervention efforts. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the association of sociodemographic (including key disparity-related variables) and knowledge with lung cancer screening behavior. This cross-sectional, descriptive study used survey methodology to collect data from 438 screening-eligible individuals in the state of Indiana between January and February 2017 and measured sociodemographic variables and knowledge about lung cancer and screening. Key sociodemographic and health status characteristics associated with screening behavior included race, geographic area of residence, income, health insurance, and family history of lung cancer. Of the variables generally reflective of disparities, key differences were noted by race and geographic area of residence with total knowledge scores as well as screening behavior, respectively. Results indicate key differences in race and geographic area of residence that may perpetuate screening behavior disparities. We have a unique opportunity at this early implementation stage in lung cancer screening to learn what variables influence screening behavior from our target patient population. This knowledge can be used to design equitable patient outreach programs, meaningful, tailored patient engagement materials, and effective patient-clinician decision support tools., • Lung cancer screening is a relatively new screening option for long-term smokers. • Key racial and residential differences were noted that may perpetuate screening disparities. • Identifying screening behavior disparities early is critical to effective implementation.
Lung Cancer Screening Participation: Developing a Conceptual Model to Guide Research
(Springer, 2016-11-01) Carter-Harris, Lisa; Davis, Lorie L.; Rawl, Susan M.; School of Nursing
Purpose: To describe the development of a conceptual model to guide research focused on lung cancer screening participation from the perspective of the individual in the decision-making process. Methods: Based on a comprehensive review of empirical and theoretical literature, a conceptual model was developed linking key psychological variables (stigma, medical mistrust, fatalism, worry, and fear) to the health belief model and precaution adoption process model. Results: Proposed model concepts have been examined in prior research of either lung or other cancer screening behavior. To date, a few studies have explored a limited number of variables that influence screening behavior in lung cancer specifically. Therefore, relationships among concepts in the model have been proposed and future research directions presented. Conclusion: This proposed model is an initial step to support theoretically based research. As lung cancer screening becomes more widely implemented, it is critical to theoretically guide research to understand variables that may be associated with lung cancer screening participation. Findings from future research guided by the proposed conceptual model can be used to refine the model and inform tailored intervention development.
Development and Usability Testing of a Computer-Tailored Decision Support Tool for Lung Cancer Screening: Study Protocol
(JMIR, 2017) Carter-Harris, Lisa; Comer, Robert Skipworth; Goyal, Anurag; Vode, Emilee Christine; Hanna, Nasser; Ceppa, DuyKhanh; Rawl, Susan M.; School of Nursing
Background: Awareness of lung cancer screening remains low in the screening-eligible population, and when patients visit their clinician never having heard of lung cancer screening, engaging in shared decision making to arrive at an informed decision can be a challenge. Therefore, methods to effectively support both patients and clinicians to engage in these important discussions are essential. To facilitate shared decision making about lung cancer screening, effective methods to prepare patients to have these important discussions with their clinician are needed. Objective: Our objective is to develop a computer-tailored decision support tool that meets the certification criteria of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards instrument version 4.0 that will support shared decision making in lung cancer screening decisions. Methods: Using a 3-phase process, we will develop and test a prototype of a computer-tailored decision support tool in a sample of lung cancer screening-eligible individuals. In phase I, we assembled a community advisory board comprising 10 screening-eligible individuals to develop the prototype. In phase II, we recruited a sample of 13 screening-eligible individuals to test the prototype for usability, acceptability, and satisfaction. In phase III, we are conducting a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) with 60 screening-eligible participants who have never been screened for lung cancer. Outcomes tested include lung cancer and screening knowledge, lung cancer screening health beliefs (perceived risk, perceived benefits, perceived barriers, and self-efficacy), perception of being prepared to engage in a patient-clinician discussion about lung cancer screening, occurrence of a patient-clinician discussion about lung cancer screening, and stage of adoption for lung cancer screening. Results: Phases I and II are complete. Phase III is underway. As of July 15, 2017, 60 participants have been enrolled into the study, and have completed the baseline survey, intervention, and first follow-up survey. We expect to have results by December 31, 2017 and to have data analysis completed by March 1, 2018. Conclusions: Results from usability testing indicate that the computer-tailored decision support tool is easy to use, is helpful, and provides a satisfactory experience for the user. At the conclusion of phase III (pilot RCT), we will have preliminary effect sizes to inform a future fully powered RCT on changes in (1) knowledge about lung cancer and screening, (2) perceived risk of lung cancer, (3) perceived benefits of lung cancer screening, (4) perceived barriers to lung cancer screening, (5) self-efficacy for lung cancer screening, and (6) perceptions of being adequately prepared to engage in a discussion with their clinician about lung cancer screening.
Current Smokers’ Preferences for Receiving Cessation Information in a Lung Cancer Screening Setting
(Springer, 2017) Carter-Harris, Lisa; Schwindt, Rhonda; Bakkoyannis, Giorgos; Ceppa, DuyKhanh Pham; School of Nursing
The purpose of this study was to identify current smokers’ communication format preferences for receiving smoking cessation information in a lung cancer screening setting. A cross-sectional correlational design using survey methodology with 159 screening-eligible current smokers was the method used. Data was dichotomized (digital versus traditional preference) and analyzed using Pearson’s chi-squared test, Mann-Whitney U test, and logistic regression. Race was a statistically significant predictor with White participants having four times greater odds of reporting preference for a digital format for receiving smoking cessation information such as social media and/or supportive text messages (OR: 4.06; p = 0.004). Lung cancer screening is a new venue where current long-term smokers can be offered information about smoking cessation while they are engaging in a health-promoting behavior and potentially more likely to contemplate quitting. It is important to consider the communication format preference of current smokers to support cessation uptake. This study is the first to examine communication format preference of current smokers in the context of the lung cancer screening venue. Key differences noted by race support the need for further research examining multiple formats of communication with efforts to maximize options in the cancer screening setting.

Browse

Recent Submissions