Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/221924
Title: The interstitial lung disease patient pathway: from referral to diagnosis
Author: Lough, Graham
Abdulqawi, Rayid
Amanda, Gina
Antoniou, Katerina
Azuma, Arata
Baldi, Milind
Bayoumy, Ahmed
Behr, Jürgen
Bendstrup, Elisabeth
Bouros, Demosthenes
Brown, Kevin
Chaudhuri, Nazia
J. Corte, Tamera
Cottin, Vincent
Crestani, Bruno
R. Flaherty, Kevin
Glaspole, Ian
Kawano-dourado, Leticia
P. Keane, Michael
Kolb, Martin
J. Martinez, Fernando
Molina-molina, Maria
Ojanguren, Iñigo
Pearmain, Laurence
Raghu, Ganesh
Rottoli, Paola
C. Stanel, Stefan
Tabaj, Gabriela
Vancheri, Carlo
Varela, Brenda
Wang, Bonnie
Wells, Athol
Rivera-ortega, Pilar
Issue Date: 10-Oct-2024
Publisher: European Respiratory Society (ERS)
Abstract: Background Suspected interstitial lung disease (ILD) patients may be referred to an ILD-specialist centre or a non-ILD-specialist centre for diagnosis and treatment. Early referral and management of patients at ILD-specialist centres has been shown to improve survival and reduce hospitalisations. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the ILD patient diagnostic pathway and prompted centres to adapt. This study investigates and contrasts ILD patient pathways in ILD-specialist and non-ILD-specialist centres, focusing on referrals, caseloads, diagnostic tools, multi-disciplinary team (MDT) meeting practices and resource accessibility. Methods Conducted as a cross-sectional study, a global self-selecting survey ran from September 2022 to January 2023. Participants included ILD specialists and healthcare professionals (HCPs) from ILDspecialist centres and non-ILD-specialist centres. Results Of 363 unique respondents from 64 countries, 259 were from ILD-specialist centres and 104 from non-ILD-specialist centres. ILD centres had better resource availability, exhibiting higher utilisation of diagnostic tests (median: 12 tests) than non-ILD centres (nine tests) and better access to specialist professions attending MDT meetings (median: six professions at meeting) in specialist centres than nonILD centres (three professions at meeting). Transitioning to virtual MDT meetings allowed HCPs from other locations to join meetings in nearly 90% of all centres, increasing regular participation in 60% of specialist centres and 72% of non-ILD centres. For treatment of patients, specialist centres had better access to antifibrotic drugs (91%) compared to non-ILD centres (60%). Conclusions Diagnostic pathways for ILD patients diverged between specialist centres and non-ILD centres. Disparities in resource and specialist availability existed between centres.
Note: Reproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00899-2024
It is part of: ERJ Open Research, 2024, vol. 11, issue. 2, p. 00899-2024
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/2445/221924
Related resource: https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00899-2024
Appears in Collections:Articles publicats en revistes (Institut d'lnvestigació Biomèdica de Bellvitge (IDIBELL))

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
ERJ Open Res-2025-Lough-00899-2024.pdf1.09 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.