Understanding Washington State's Low Uptake of Lung Cancer Screening in Two Steps: A Geospatial Analysis of Patient Travel Time and Health Care Availability of Imaging Sites.

Welch AC, Gorden JA, Mooney SJ, Wilshire CL, Zeliadt SB. Understanding Washington State's Low Uptake of Lung Cancer Screening in Two Steps: A Geospatial Analysis of Patient Travel Time and Health Care Availability of Imaging Sites. Chest. 2024 May 28.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Early detection of lung cancer reduces cancer mortality; yet uptake for lung cancer screening (LCS) has been limited in Washington State. Geographic disparities contribute to low uptake, but do not wholly explain gaps in access for underserved populations. Other factors, such as an adequate workforce to meet population demand and the capacity of accredited screening facility sites, must also be considered. RESEARCH QUESTION: What proportion of the eligible population for LCS has access to LCS facilities in Washington State? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We used the enhanced two-step floating catchment area (E2SFCA) model to evaluate how geographic accessibility in addition to availability of LCS imaging centers contribute to disparities. We used available data on radiologic technologist volume at each American College of Radiology (ACR)-accredited screening facility site to estimate the capacity of each site to meet potential population demand. Spearman rank correlation coefficients of the spatial access ratios were compared with the 2010 Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) codes and area deprivation index quintiles to identify characteristics of populations at risk for lung cancer with greater and lesser levels of access. RESULTS: A total of 549 radiologic technologists were identified across the 95 ACR-accredited screening facilities. We observed that 95% of the eligible population had proximate geographic access to any ACR facility. However, when we incorporated the E2SFCA method, we found significant variation of access for eligible populations. The inclusion of the availability measure attenuated access for most of the eligible population. Furthermore, we observed that rural areas were substantially correlated, and areas with greater socioeconomic disadvantage were modestly correlated, with lower access. INTERPRETATION: Rural and socioeconomically disadvantaged areas face significant disparities. The E2SFCA models demonstrated that capacity is an important component and how geographic access and availability jointly contribute to disparities in access to LCS.