Using Radiology Reports to Encourage Evidence-based Practice in the Evaluation of Small, Incidentally Detected Pulmonary Nodules. A Preliminary Study

Development of a Pulmonary Nodule Service and Clinical Pathway: A Pragmatic Approach Addressing an Unmet Need

Background/Objectives: The surveillance of patients with incidental pulmonary nodules overloads existing respiratory and lung cancer clinics, as well as multidisciplinary team meetings. In our clinical setting, until 2018, we had numerous patients with incidental pulmonary nodules inundating our outpatient clinics; therefore, the need to develop a novel service and dedicated clinical pathway arose. The aims of this study are to 1. provide (a) a model of setting up a novel pulmonary nodule service, and (b) a pragmatic clinical pathway to address the increasing need for surveillance of patients with incidental pulmonary nodules. 2. share real-world data from a dedicated pulmonary nodule service running in a tertiary setting with existing resources. Methods: A retrospective review of established processes and referral mechanisms to our tertiary pulmonary nodule service was conducted. We have also performed a retrospective collection and review of data for patients reviewed and discussed in our tertiary pulmonary nodule service between April 2018 and April 2024. Results: Our tertiary pulmonary nodule service (PNS) comprises a dedicated pulmonary nodule clinic, a nodule multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting and a dedicated proforma referral system. Due to the current national health system legislation and relevant processes, patients are required to physically attend clinic appointments. There are various sources of referral, including other departments within the hospital, other hospitals, various specialties in primary care and self-referrals. Between 15 April 2018 and 15 April 2024, 2203 patients were reviewed in the pulmonary nodule clinic (903 females, 1300 males, mean age 64 ± 19 years). Of those patients, 65% (1432/2203) were current smokers. A total of 1365 new patients and 838 follow-up patients were reviewed in total. Emphysema was radiologically present in 72% of patients, and 75% of those (1189/1586) already had a confirmed diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Coronary calcification was identified in 32% (705/2203), and 78% of those (550/705) were already known to cardiology services. Interestingly, 27% (368/1365) of the new patients were discharged following their first MDT meeting discussion, and 67% of these were discharged as the reason for their referral was an intrapulmonary lymph node which did not warrant any further action. Among all patients, 11% (246/2203) were referred to the multidisciplinary thoracic oncology service (MTOS) due to suspicious appearances/changes in their nodules that warranted further investigation, and from those, 37% were discharged (92/246) from the MTOS. The lung cancer diagnosis rate was 7% (154/2203). Conclusions: The applied pathway offers a pragmatic approach in setting up a service that addresses an increasing patient need. Its application is feasible in a tertiary care setting, and admin support is of vital importance to ensure patients are appropriately tracked and not lost to follow-up. Real-world data from pulmonary nodules services provide a clear overview and contribute to understanding patients' characteristics and improving service provision.

Improving communication of unexpected findings: The radiology actional findings tracking (RAFT) program

Incidental findings are unexpected, actionable discoveries made on diagnostic imaging that have significant patient care and medicolegal implications if not well managed. Despite their importance, few systems exist to manage incidental findings. The Radiology Actionable Findings Tracking (RAFT) Program was developed to improve communication of incidental findings to radiologists, providers, and their patients. The RAFT template is incorporated into the electronic medical record and discloses important information such as: Finding, Acuity, Communication Status, and General Recommendation for follow-up. This data is automatically compiled into a spreadsheet monitored by a clinical coordinator who is responsible for notifying the primary care physician or referring provider. The alert is resolved once appropriate communication is made and the recommended follow-up measures are documented. Between January 2021 and June 2023, the program has tracked the communication of 2,243 incidental findings, for an average of 75 incidental findings each month. Of those total findings, 270 findings (12 %) triggered additional protocols for provider and patient notification with subsequent follow-up. The program is effective in improving communication of incidental findings and can serve as a valuable tool for radiologists, providers, and the patients they serve.

Recommendations to Improve Management of Incidental Pulmonary Nodules in Canada: Expert Panel Consensus

Introduction: Incidental pulmonary nodules (IPN) are common radiologic findings, yet management of IPNs is inconsistent across Canada. This study aims to improve IPN management based on multidisciplinary expert consensus and provides recommendations to overcome patient and system-level barriers. Methods: A modified Delphi consensus technique was conducted. Multidisciplinary experts with extensive experience in lung nodule management in Canada were recruited to participate in the panel. A survey was administered in 3 rounds, using a 5-point Likert scale to determine the level of agreement (1 = extremely agree, 5 = extremely disagree). Results: Eleven experts agreed to participate in the panel; 10 completed all 3 rounds. Consensus was achieved for 183/217 (84.3%) statements. Panellists agreed that radiology reports should include a standardized summary of findings and follow-up recommendations for all nodule sizes (ie, <6, 6-8, and >8 mm). There was strong consensus regarding the importance of an automated system for patient follow-up and that leadership support for organizational change at the administrative level is of utmost importance in improving IPN management. There was no consensus on the need for standardized national referral pathways, development of new guidelines, or establishing a uniform picture archiving and communication system. Conclusion: Canadian IPN experts agree that improved IPN management should include standardized radiology reporting of IPNs, standardized and automated follow-up of patients with IPNs, guideline adherence and implementation, and leadership support for organizational change. Future research should focus on the implementation and long-term effectiveness of these recommendations in clinical practice.

Incidental pulmonary nodules - current guidelines and management

BACKGROUND

Due to the greater use of high-resolution cross-sectional imaging, the number of incidental pulmonary nodules detected each year is increasing. Although the vast majority of incidental pulmonary nodules are benign, many early lung carcinomas could be diagnosed with consistent follow-up. However, for a variety of reasons, the existing recommendations are often not implemented correctly. Therefore, potential for improvement with respect to competence, communication, structure, and process is described.

METHODS

This article presents the recommendations for incidental pulmonary nodules from the current S3 guideline for lung cancer (July 2023). The internationally established recommendations (BTS guidelines and Fleischner criteria) are compared and further studies on optimized management were included after a systematic literature search in PubMed.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

In particular, AI-based software solutions are promising, as they can be used in a support capacity on several levels at once and can lead to simpler and more automated management. However, to be applicable in routine clinical practice, software must fit well into the radiology workflow and be integrated. In addition, "Lung Nodule Management" programs or clinics that follow a high-quality procedure for patients with incidental lung nodules or nodules detected by screening have been established in the USA. Similar structures might also be implemented in Germany in a future screening program in which patients with incidental pulmonary nodules could be included.

KEY POINTS

· Incidental pulmonary nodules are common but are often not adequately managed. · The updated S3 guideline for lung cancer now includes recommendations for incidental pulmonary nodules. · Competence, communication, structure, and process levels offer significant potential for improvement.

CITATION FORMAT

· Glandorf J, Vogel-Claussen J, . Incidental pulmonary nodules - current guidelines and management. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2024; 196: 582 - 590.

Fleischner Society Guideline Recommendations for Incidentally Detected Pulmonary Nodules and the Probability of Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

The Fleischner Society aims to limit further evaluations of incidentally detected pulmonary nodules when the probability of lung cancer is <1% and to pursue further evaluations when the probability of lung cancer is ≥1%. To evaluate the internal consistency of guideline goals and recommendations, the authors evaluated stratum-specific recommendations and 2-year probabilities of lung cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study (2005-2015) was conducted of individuals enrolled in one of two integrated health systems with solid nodules incidentally detected on CT. The 2017 Fleischner Society guidelines were used to define strata on the basis of smoking status and nodule size and number. Lung cancer diagnoses within 2 years of nodule detection were ascertained using cancer registry data. Confidence interval (CI) inspection was used to determine if stratum-specific probabilities of lung cancer were different than 1%.

RESULTS

Among 5,444 individuals with incidentally detected lung nodule (median age, 66 years; 54% women; 57% smoked; median nodule size, 5.5 mm; 55% with multiple nodules) 214 (3.9%; 95% CI, 3.4%-4.5%) were diagnosed with lung cancer within 2 years. For 7 of 12 strata (58%), 2,765 patients (51%), and 194 lung cancer cases (91%), there was alignment between Fleischner Society goals and recommendations. Alignment was indeterminate for 5 strata (42%), 2,679 patients (49%), and 20 lung cancer cases (9%) because CIs for the probability of lung cancer spanned 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Fleischner Society guideline goals and recommendations align at least half the time. It is uncertain whether alignment of guideline goals and recommendations occurs more often.

Novel Quality Measure Set: Closing the Completion Loop on Radiology Follow-up Recommendations for Noncritical Actionable Incidental Findings

BACKGROUND

Care gaps occur when radiology follow-up recommendations are poorly communicated or not completed, resulting in missed or delayed diagnosis potentially leading to worse patient outcomes. This ACR-led initiative assembled a technical expert panel (TEP) to advise development of quality measures intended to improve communication and drive increased completion rates for radiology follow-up recommendations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multistakeholder TEP was assembled to advise the development of quality measures. The project scope, limited to noncritical actionable incidental findings (AIFs), encourages practices to develop and implement systems ensuring appropriate communication and follow-up to completion.

RESULTS

A suite of nine measures were developed: four outcome measures include closing the loop on completion of radiology follow-up recommendations for nonemergent AIFs (with pulmonary nodule and abdominal aortic aneurysm use cases) and overall cancer diagnoses. Five process measures address communication and tracking of AIFs: inclusion of available evidence or guidelines informing the recommendation, communication of AIFs to the practice managing ongoing care, identifying when AIFs have been communicated to the patient, and employing tracking and reminder systems for AIFs.

CONCLUSION

This ACR-led initiative developed a measure set intended to improve patient outcomes by ensuring that AIFs are appropriately communicated and followed up. The intent of these measures is to focus improvement on specific areas in which gaps in communication and AIF follow-up may occur, prompting systems to devote resources that will identify and implement solutions to improve patient care.

Management Strategies to Promote Follow-Up Care for Incidental Findings: A Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Incidentalomas, or unexpectedly identified masses, are frequently identified in diagnostic imaging studies. Incidentalomas may require timely follow-up care to determine if they are benign, disease-causing, or malignant lesions; however, many incidentalomas do not receive diagnostic workup. The most effective strategies to manage incidentalomas and optimal metrics for judging the efficacy of these strategies remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To identify management strategies used to promote guideline-concordant follow-up for incidentalomas and commonly reported performance metrics associated with these strategies.

DATA SOURCES

We searched peer-reviewed literature for incidentaloma management studies published between 2003 and 2020.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data extraction included anatomical location, imaging modality, clinical setting, management strategy characteristics, and metrics used to assess the management strategy. Eligible studies were analyzed qualitatively to describe strategies and metrics.

RESULTS

In all, 15 studies met inclusion criteria. Four types of interventions designed to promote guideline-concordant follow-up care for incidentalomas were identified: (1) physical or verbal guideline reminders (n = 3); (2) electronic guideline references (n = 4); (3) enhanced radiology templates (n = 3); (4) restructured clinical and communication pathways (n = 5). Strategy efficacy was assessed by measuring rates of patients who received recommended follow-up care (n = 6) or had care recommendations documented in clinical records (n = 5). Few studies measured diagnostic outcomes associated with incidentalomas.

CONCLUSIONS

Most management strategies target changes in radiologists' behavior. Few studies address barriers to improving incidentaloma follow-up from interpretation to patient education of findings and care delivery. Hybrid effectiveness-implementation studies are needed to better address workflow barriers and rigorously evaluate care delivery outcomes.

Statistical modeling can determine what factors are predictive of appropriate follow-up in patients presenting with incidental pulmonary nodules on CT

PURPOSE

To assess the performance of statistical modeling in predicting follow-up adherence of incidentally detected pulmonary nodules (IPN) on CT, based on patient variables (PV), radiology report related variables (RRRV) and physician-patient communication variables (PPCV).

METHODS

200 patients with IPN on CT were retrospectively identified and randomly selected. PV (age, gender, smoking status, ethnicity), RRRV (nodule size, patient context, whether follow-up recommendations were provided) and PPCV (whether referring physician documented IPN and ordered follow-up on the electronic medical record) were recorded. Primary outcome was whether patients received appropriate follow-up within +/- 1 month of the recommended time frame. Statistical methods included logistic regression and machine learning (K-nearest neighbors and support vector machine).

RESULTS

Adherence was low, with or without recommendations provided in the radiology report (23.4 %-27.4 %). Whether the referring physician ordered follow-up was the dominant predictor of adherence in all models. The following variables were statistically significant predictors of whether referring physician ordered follow-up: recommendations provided in the radiology report, smoking status, patient context and nodule size (FDR logworth of respectively 21.18, 11.66, 2.35, 1.63, p < 0.05). Prediction accuracy varied from 72 % (PV) to 93 % (PPCV, all variables).

CONCLUSION

PPCV are the most important predictors of adherence. Amongst all variables, patient context, smoking status, nodule size, and whether the radiologist provided follow-up recommendations in the report were all statistically significant predictors of patient follow-up adherence, supporting the utility of statistical modeling for analytics, quality assurance and optimization of outcomes related to IPN.

Does this lung nodule need urgent review? A discrete choice experiment of Australian general practitioners

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer mortality in Australia. Guidelines suggest that patients with suspected lung cancer on thoracic imaging be referred for urgent specialist review. However, the term "suspected" is broad and includes the common finding of lung nodules, which often require periodic surveillance rather than urgent invasive investigation. The British Thoracic Society recommends that a lung nodule with a PanCan risk > 10% be considered for invasive investigation. This study aimed to assess which factors influence general practitioners (GPs) to request urgent review for a lung nodule and if these factors concur with PanCan risk prediction model variables.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment was developed that produced 32 individual case vignettes. Each vignette contained eight variables, four of which form the parsimonious PanCan risk prediction model. Two additional vignettes were created that addressed haemoptysis with a normal chest computed tomography (CT) scan and isolated mediastinal lymphadenopathy. The survey was distributed to 4160 randomly selected Australian GPs and they were asked if the patients in the vignettes required urgent (less than two weeks) specialist review. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with request for urgent review.

RESULTS

Completed surveys were received from 3.7% of participants, providing 152 surveys (1216 case vignettes) for analysis. The factors associated with request for urgent review were nodule spiculation (adj-OR 5.57, 95% CI 3.88-7.99, p < 0.0001), larger nodule size, presentation with haemoptysis (adj-OR 4.79, 95% CI 3.05-7.52, p < 0.0001) or weight loss (adj-OR 4.87, 95% CI 3.13-7.59, p < 0.0001), recommendation for urgent review by the reporting radiologist (adj-OR 4.68, 95% CI 2.86-7.65, p < 0.0001) and female GP gender (adj-OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.36-2.56, p 0.0001). In low risk lung nodules (PanCan risk < 10%), there was significant variability in perceived sense of urgency. Most GPs (83%) felt that a patient with haemoptysis and a normal chest CT scan did not require urgent specialist review but that a patient with isolated mediastinal lymphadenopathy did (75%).

CONCLUSION

Future lung cancer investigation pathways may benefit from the addition of a risk prediction model to reduce variations in referral behavior for low risk lung nodules.

National Survey of Hospitalists' Experiences with Incidental Pulmonary Nodules

Incidental pulmonary nodules (IPNs) are common and often require follow-up. The Fleischner Society guidelines were created to support IPN management. We developed a 14-item survey to examine hospitalists' exposure to and management of IPNs. The survey targeted attendees of the 2016 Society of Hospital Medicine (SHM) annual conference. We recruited 174 attendees. In total, 82% were identified as hospitalist physicians and 7% as advanced practice providers; 63% practiced for >5 years and 62% supervised trainees. All reported seeing ≥1 IPN case in the past six months, with 39% seeing three to five cases and 39% seeing six or more cases. Notwithstanding, 42% were unfamiliar with the Fleischner Society guidelines. When determining the IPN follow-up, 83% used radiology report recommendations, 64% consulted national or international guidelines, and 34% contacted radiologists; 34% agreed that determining the follow-up was challenging; only 15% reported availability of automated tracking systems. In conclusion, despite frequent IPN exposure, hospitalists are frequently unaware of the Fleischner Society guidelines and rely on radiologists' recommendations.

New RANZCR clinical radiology written report guidelines

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) Radiology Written Report Guideline was first issued in 2011. A survey-based consultation of clinical radiology members of the college in 2015 found that the vast majority of 235 respondents supported all components of the guideline. Since the original guideline was developed, considerable new research has been published about radiology reporting, particularly regarding structured/template reports. In 2016/17 a RANZCR working group used the consultation results, stakeholder feedback and recent research to develop revised guidelines. This article outlines the consultation survey results and guideline revision process as well as some of the supporting evidence from the literature.

Patient and Clinician Characteristics Associated with Adherence. A Cohort Study of Veterans with Incidental Pulmonary Nodules

RATIONALE

Many patients are diagnosed with small pulmonary nodules for which professional societies recommend subsequent imaging surveillance. Adherence to these guidelines involves many steps from both clinicians and patients but has not been well studied.

OBJECTIVES

In a health care setting with a nodule tracking system, we evaluated the association of communication processes and distress with patient and clinician adherence to recommended follow up and Fleischner Society guidelines, respectively.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, longitudinally assessed, cohort study of patients with incidentally detected nodules who received care at one Veterans Affairs Medical Center. We measured patient-centered communication with the Consultation Care Measure and distress with the Impact of Event Scale. We abstracted data regarding participant adherence to clinician recommendations (defined as receiving the follow-up scan within 30 d of the recommended date) and clinician adherence to Fleischner guidelines (defined as planning the follow-up scan within 30 d of the recommended interval) from the electronic medical record. We measured associations of communication and distress with adherence using multivariable-adjusted generalized estimating equations.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Among 138 veterans, 39% were nonadherent at least once during follow up. Clinicians were nonadherent to Fleischner guidelines for 27% of follow-up scans. High-quality communication (adjusted odds ratio, 3.65; P = 0.02) and distress (adjusted odds ratio, 0.38; P = 0.02) were associated with increased and decreased participant adherence, respectively. Neither was associated with clinician adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and clinicians often do not adhere to nodule follow-up recommendations. Interventions designed to improve communication quality and decrease distress may also improve patient adherence to nodule follow-up recommendations.

The fate of radiology report recommendations at a pediatric medical center

BACKGROUND

The American College of Radiology (ACR) practice parameters for communication dictate that follow-up recommendations be suggested when appropriate. Radiologists assume that referring physicians read their reports and heed their advice. In reality, recommendations might not be carried out or even acknowledged.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the proportion of imaging recommendations that are acknowledged and acted upon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of all consecutive radiology reports containing "recommend" in the impression at a single academic children's hospital over a 1-month period. We documented point of care (emergency department, inpatient, outpatient), study type, recommendation wording, and communication method (report only or direct verbal). We reviewed medical records to ascertain whether the recommendations were acknowledged or executed. We used chi-square tests to evaluate associations between variables. P<0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

We reviewed 526 reports and excluded 73. We included the remaining 453 reports, from 370 unique patients (201 male, 169 female). Inpatients comprised most reports (n=223), followed by emergency department (ED) patients (n=118) and outpatients (n=112). Among these reports, 69% (n=313) of recommendations were executed. Of the 140 recommendations not carried out, 14% were acknowledged in clinical notes. Compliance correlated with point of care (ED>inpatient>outpatient; P=0.001) but not with additional verbal communication (P=0.33), study type (radiograph vs. other; P=0.35) or type of follow-up recommendation (follow-up imaging vs. other; P=0.99).

CONCLUSION

Nearly one-third of radiology report follow-up recommendations are not executed. Recommendations are most commonly neglected for outpatient imaging reports. The radiology community should take steps to improve recommendation adherence.

Lung Cancer Screening Update

Since the release of the US Preventive Services Task Force and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services recommendations for lung cancer screening, low-dose chest computed tomography screening has moved from the research arena to clinical practice. Lung cancer screening programs must reach beyond image acquisition and interpretation and engage in a multidisciplinary effort of clinical shared decision-making, standardization of imaging and nodule management, smoking cessation, and patient follow-up. Standardization of radiologic reports and nodule management will systematize patient care, provide quality assurance, further reduce harm, and contain health care costs. Although the National Lung Screening Trial results and eligibility criteria of a heavy smoking history are the foundation for the standard guidelines for low-dose chest computed tomography screening in the United States, currently only 27% of patients diagnosed with lung cancer would meet US lung cancer screening recommendations. Current and future efforts must be directed to better delineate those patients who would most benefit from screening and to ensure that the benefits of screening reach all socioeconomic strata and racial and ethnic minorities. Further optimization of lung cancer screening program design and patient eligibility will assure that lung cancer screening benefits will outweigh the potential risks to our patients.

Addition of the Fleischner Society Guidelines to Chest CT Examination Interpretive Reports Improves Adherence to Recommended Follow-up Care for Incidental Pulmonary Nodules

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to determine whether the addition of the Fleischner Society guidelines to chest computed tomography (CT) reports identifying incidental pulmonary nodules affects follow-up care.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Beginning in 2008, a template containing the Fleischner Society guidelines was added at the interpreting radiologist's discretion to chest CT reports describing incidental solid pulmonary nodules at our institution. The records of all medical centers in Olmsted county were used to capture the complete medical history of local patients >35 years old diagnosed with a pulmonary nodule from April 1, 2008 to October 1, 2011. Patients with a history of cancer or previously diagnosed nodule, or who died before follow-up, were excluded. Patients were categorized according to whether they did ("template group") or did not ("control group") have the template added. Nodule size and smoking history were used to determine recommended follow-up care. Differences in follow-up were compared between groups using Pearson's chi-square test.

RESULTS

A total of 510 patients (276 in the template group, 234 in the control group) were included in the study. Only 198 patients (39%) received their recommended follow-up care. Template group patients were significantly more likely to receive recommended follow-up care compared to control group patients (45% vs 31%, P = .0014). Most patients whose management did not adhere to Fleischner Society guidelines did not receive a recommended follow-up chest CT (210 out of 312, 67%).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of the Fleischner Society guidelines to chest CT reports significantly increases the likelihood of receiving recommended follow-up care for patients with incidental pulmonary nodules. Additional education is needed to improve appropriate guideline utilization by radiologists and adherence by ordering providers.

An official American Thoracic Society/American College of Chest Physicians policy statement: implementation of low-dose computed tomography lung cancer screening programs in clinical practice

RATIONALE

Annual low-radiation-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening for lung cancer has been shown to reduce lung cancer mortality among high-risk individuals and is now recommended by multiple organizations. However, LDCT screening is complex, and implementation requires careful planning to ensure benefits outweigh harms. Little guidance has been provided for sites wishing to develop and implement lung cancer screening programs.

OBJECTIVES

To promote successful implementation of comprehensive LDCT screening programs that are safe, effective, and sustainable.

METHODS

The American Thoracic Society (ATS) and American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) convened a committee with expertise in lung cancer screening, pulmonary nodule evaluation, and implementation science. The committee reviewed the evidence from systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines, surveys, and the experience of early-adopting LDCT screening programs and summarized potential strategies to implement LDCT screening programs successfully.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We address steps that sites should consider during the main three phases of developing an LDCT screening program: planning, implementation, and maintenance. We present multiple strategies to implement the nine core elements of comprehensive lung cancer screening programs enumerated in a recent ACCP/ATS statement, which will allow sites to select the strategy that best fits with their local context and workflow patterns. Although we do not comment on cost-effectiveness of LDCT screening, we outline the necessary costs associated with starting and sustaining a high-quality LDCT screening program.

CONCLUSIONS

Following the strategies delineated in this policy statement may help sites to develop comprehensive LDCT screening programs that are safe and effective.

Primary Care Providers and a System Problem: A Qualitative Study of Clinicians Caring for Patients With Incidental Pulmonary Nodules

BACKGROUND

As lung cancer screening with low-dose CT scanning is implemented, an increasing number of people will be diagnosed with pulmonary nodules. Primary care clinicians care for the vast majority of these patients, but their experiences with communication and managing distress in this population are not well understood.

METHODS

We conducted qualitative interviews of 15 primary care providers (PCPs) at two academic medical centers who care for patients with pulmonary nodules. We used qualitative description analysis, focusing on clinicians' information exchange and other communication behaviors.

RESULTS

Most PCPs believed they had inadequate information to counsel patients regarding lung nodules, although this information is desired. PCPs were concerned patients could "fall through the cracks" but did not have access to a reliable system to ensure follow-up adherence. They were limited by time, knowledge, and resources in providing the preferred level of care. Most PCPs did not discuss the specific risk a nodule was lung cancer, in part because they did not have ready access to this information. PCPs believed most patients did not have substantial distress as a result of nodule detection. Most PCPs did not include patients when making decisions about the follow-up plan.

CONCLUSIONS

PCPs often lack systemic resources to optimize patient-centered approaches when discussing incidental pulmonary nodules with patients. With the advent of lung cancer screening, pulmonologists can assist primary care colleagues by providing accurate information to counsel patients and assisting in managing conversations about the risk of cancer. Pulmonologists should support efforts to implement reliable systems to ensure adherence to follow-up.

An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement: A Research Framework for Pulmonary Nodule Evaluation and Management

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary nodules are frequently detected during diagnostic chest imaging and as a result of lung cancer screening. Current guidelines for their evaluation are largely based on low-quality evidence, and patients and clinicians could benefit from more research in this area.

METHODS

In this research statement from the American Thoracic Society, a multidisciplinary group of clinicians, researchers, and patient advocates reviewed available evidence for pulmonary nodule evaluation, characterized six focus areas to direct future research efforts, and identified fundamental gaps in knowledge and strategies to address them. We did not use formal mechanisms to prioritize one research area over another or to achieve consensus.

RESULTS

There was widespread agreement that novel tests (including novel imaging tests and biopsy techniques, biomarkers, and prognostic models) may improve diagnostic accuracy for identifying cancerous nodules. Before they are used in clinical practice, however, better evidence is needed to show that they improve more distal outcomes of importance to patients. In addition, the pace of research and the quality of clinical care would be improved by the development of registries that link demographic and nodule characteristics with patient-level outcomes. Methods to share data from registries are also necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

This statement may help researchers to develop impactful and innovative research projects and enable funders to better judge research proposals. We hope that it will accelerate the pace and increase the efficiency of discovery to improve the quality of care for patients with pulmonary nodules.

Resource use and guideline concordance in evaluation of pulmonary nodules for cancer: too much and too little care

IMPORTANCE

Pulmonary nodules are common, and more will be found with implementation of lung cancer screening. How potentially malignant pulmonary nodules are evaluated may affect patient outcomes, health care costs, and effectiveness of lung cancer screening programs. Guidelines for evaluating pulmonary nodules for cancer exist, but little is known about how nodules are evaluated in the usual care setting.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize nodule evaluation and concordance with guidelines.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted including detailed review of medical records from pulmonary nodule detection through evaluation completion, cancer diagnosis, or study end (December 31, 2012). The participants included 300 adults with pulmonary nodules from 15 Veterans Affairs hospitals.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Resources used for evaluation at any Veterans Affairs facility and guideline-concordant evaluation served as the main outcomes.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven of 300 patients (9.0%) with pulmonary nodules ultimately received a diagnosis of lung cancer: 1 of 57 (1.8%) with a nodule of 4 mm or less, 4 of 134 (3.0%) with a nodule of 5 to 8 mm, and 22 of 109 (20.2%) with a nodule larger than 8 mm. Nodule evaluation entailed 1044 imaging studies, 147 consultations, 76 biopsies, 13 resections, and 21 hospitalizations. Radiographic surveillance (n = 277) lasted a median of 13 months but ranged from less than 0.5 months to 8.5 years. Forty-six patients underwent invasive procedures (range per patient, 1-4): 41.3% (19 patients) did not have cancer and 17.4% (8) experienced complications, including 1 death. Notably, 15 of the 300 (5.0%) received no purposeful evaluation and had no obvious reason for deferral, seemingly "falling through the cracks." Among 197 patients with a nodule detected after release of the Fleischner Society guidelines, 44.7% received care inconsistent with guidelines (17.8% overevaluation, 26.9% underevaluation). In multivariable analyses, the strongest predictor of guideline-inconsistent care was inappropriate radiologist recommendations (overevaluation relative risk, 4.6 [95% CI, 2.3-9.2]; underevaluation, 4.3 [2.7-6.8]). Other systems factors associated with underevaluation included receiving care at more than 1 facility (2.0 [1.5-2.7]) and nodule detection during an inpatient or preoperative visit (1.6 [1.1-2.5]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Pulmonary nodule evaluation is often inconsistent with guidelines, including cases with no workup and others with prolonged surveillance or unneeded procedures that may cause harm. Systems to improve quality (eg, aligning radiologist recommendations with guidelines and facilitating communication across providers) are needed before lung cancer screening is widely implemented.