Lough, GrahamAbdulqawi, RayidAmanda, GinaAntoniou, KaterinaAzuma, ArataBaldi, MilindBayoumy, AhmedBehr, JürgenBendstrup, ElisabethBouros, DemosthenesBrown, KevinChaudhuri, NaziaCorte, Tamera J.Cottin, VincentCrestani, BrunoFlaherty, Kevin R.Glaspole, IanKawano Dourado, LeticiaKeane, Michael P.Kolb, MartinMartínez, Fernando J.Molina Molina, MaríaOjanguren Arranz, IñigoPearmain, LaurenceRaghu, GaneshRottoli, PaolaStanel, Stefan C.Tabaj, GabrielaVancheri, CarloVarela, BrendaWang, BonnieWells, AtholRivera Ortega, Pilar2025-06-302025-06-302024-10-102312-0541https://hdl.handle.net/2445/221924Background 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.12 p.application/pdfengcc-by-nc (c) Lough et al., 2025http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/es/Malalties del pulmóDiagnòsticPulmonary diseasesDiagnosisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article2025-06-19info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess40040894