RESUMEN
Around the globe, lung cancer is among the most prevalent cancers, accounting for significant morbidity and mortality. Compared to breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers combined, lung cancer is the leading cause of mortality. Higher survival rates are achieved with an early lung cancer diagnosis. The aggressiveness and heterogeneity of lung cancer have impeded endeavours to use screening to lower mortality from the disease. Due to studies showing that low-dose computed tomography may identify many tumors in their early stages, the development of low-dose computed tomography has significantly changed the landscape of lung cancer screening. Long-term research studies have demonstrated that low-dose computed tomography for the secondary prevention of lung cancer considerably lowers lung cancer mortality in high-risk populations. Screening with low-dose computed tomography reduces the mortality associated with it by 20-30%. Low-dose computed tomography is a fast and simple chest exam that does not involve the use of a contrast agent. Based on the current recommendations, eligible individuals with a history of heavy smoking will benefit from yearly low-dose computed tomography, but because of the risks involved, such as false-positive results, radiation exposure, and overdiagnosis, joint decision-making consultation is necessary. The purpose of this research is to review the use of low-dose computed tomography for lung cancer screening.
RESUMEN
Background: The current study aimed to examine the association between hospital nurses’ attitudes about the safety culture and patients’ views about the quality of healthcare services delivered to them during their hospitalization. Methods: This study was cross section study as well as adopted the correlational design. The study used the hospital survey on patient safety culture to assess nurses’ perceptions about the safety culture, and the consumer assessment of healthcare providers and systems survey to assess patients’ experience of care. The current study was conducted in a tertiary healthcare organization in Riyadh city in Saudi Arabia. Results: The response rates for nurses and patients were 79% and 80%, respectively. In nurses’ sample, the majority 92.9% was female and 90.6% was non-Saudi; while 43.5% of patients were male and the majority was Saudi 97.1%. More than half of the nurses 57.2% were married and 35.4% identified themselves as single. On the other hand, the majority of patients 81.5% were married and 48.7% of patients had a diploma or high school or less. Conclusions: The results of canonical correlation analysis showed positive and strong correlations between nurses’ perceptions of safety culture (facilitators and threats to patient safety) and patients’ perceptions of quality of healthcare (interpersonal care communication and technical quality of care). The canonical variates for both root pairs (canonical correlation coefficients = 0.89 and 0.81). This finding clearly proves that in workplaces where staffs have more positive perceptions of patient safety culture, patients have more positive experiences of care.