Stakeholder perspectives on implementing a universal lynch syndrome screening program: A qualitative study of early barriers and facilitators
Schneider, Jennifer L
Kauffman, Tia L
Reiss, Jacob A
Muessig, Kristin R.
Wiesner, Georgia L
Peterson, Susan K
Goddard, Katrina A.B.Note: Order does not necessarily reflect citation order of authors.
MetadataShow full item record
CitationSchneider, J. L., J. Davis, T. L. Kauffman, J. A. Reiss, C. McGinley, K. Arnold, J. Zepp, et al. 2015. “Stakeholder perspectives on implementing a universal lynch syndrome screening program: A qualitative study of early barriers and facilitators.” Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics 18 (2): 152-161. doi:10.1038/gim.2015.43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2015.43.
AbstractBackground: Evidence-based guidelines recommend that all newly diagnosed colon cancers be screened for Lynch syndrome (LS). Best practices for implementing universal tumor screening have not been extensively studied. Purpose We interviewed a range of stakeholders in an integrated health care system to identify initial factors that might promote or hinder the successful implementation of a universal (LS) screening program. Methods: We conducted interviews with health plan leaders, managers, and staff. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Thematic analysis began with a grounded approach and was also guided by the Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM). Results: We completed 14 interviews with leaders/managers and staff representing involved clinical and health plan departments. While in general stakeholders supported the concept of universal screening, they identified several internal (organizational) and external (environment) factors that promote/hinder implementation. Facilitating factors included: 1) perceived benefits of screening for patients and organization; 2) collaboration between departments; and 3) availability of organizational resources. Barriers were also found, including: 1) lack of awareness of guidelines; 2) lack of guideline clarity; 3) staffing and program “ownership” concerns; and 4) cost uncertainties. Analysis also revealed nine important infrastructure-type considerations for successful implementation. Conclusion: We found that clinical, laboratory, and administrative departments supported universal tumor screening for LS. Requirements for successful implementation may include interdepartmental collaboration and communication; patient and provider/staff education; and significant infrastructure and resource support related to laboratory processing and systems for electronic ordering and tracking.
Citable link to this pagehttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:27320321
- HMS Scholarly Articles