FreshRSS

🔒
☐ ☆ ✇ PLOS ONE Medicine&Health

Perspective of healthcare professionals on barriers and facilitators in exploring end-of-life care preferences of patients with pulmonary fibrosis: A qualitative study

Por: Lian Trapman · Lea M Dijksman · Jan C. Grutters · Saskia C.C.M. Teunissen · Everlien de Graaf — Diciembre 12th 2025 at 15:00

by Lian Trapman, Lea M Dijksman, Jan C. Grutters, Saskia C.C.M. Teunissen, Everlien de Graaf

Background

Progressive pulmonary fibrosis is a lethal disease with a survival of 3–5 years with optimal medication treatment. Palliative care and advance care planning are therefore receiving increasing attention in the literature. However, structural implementation in clinical practice is still lacking. The aim of this study was to explore the needs, facilitators, and barriers for communication on the topic of end-of-life preferences of patients from the perspective of healthcare professionals.

Methods

A generic qualitative study was performed with focus groups and individual semi structured interviews with healthcare professionals. Data collection and analysis were performed iteratively. A thematic analysis was performed, following the methods of Braun and Clarke.

Results

Three focus groups and seven individual semi-structured interviews were conducted. Three themes were generated: (1) a lack of vision on palliative care, resulting in different approaches within the same clinic and showing the need for optimization of collaboration; (2) the importance of a learning-driven environment to support healthcare professionals skills and knowledge; and (3), the central role of the individual professional in developing skills and knowledge.

Conclusions/discussion

This study underscores the importance of behavioral and organizational change in palliative care to optimize conversations exploring values, preferences, and needs for end-of-life care for patients with pulmonary fibrosis. Leveraging the shared motivation of healthcare professionals to provide optimal care, integrating these findings into training and coaching programs can further enhance patient-centered approach in palliative care.

☐ ☆ ✇ BMJ Open

Assessment of validity, reliability, responsiveness and acceptability of seven Dutch-Flemish PROMIS computerised adaptive tests (CATs) in Dutch people with type 2 diabetes: an observational and qualitative study

Por: Groeneveld · L. · Terwee · C. B. · van der Willik · E. M. · van Ittersum · F. J. · Langendoen-Gort · M. · Pals · F. · Blom · M. T. · Beulens · J. W. J. · Elders · P. J. M. · Rutters · F. — Noviembre 28th 2025 at 18:14
Objectives

This study aimed to assess construct validity against commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), test–retest reliability and responsiveness of seven Dutch-Flemish Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) computerised adaptive testing (CATs) in Dutch adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D), and assess their acceptability in healthcare providers and people with T2D.

Design

A cross-sectional observational study in people with T2D and qualitative study involving both people with T2D and healthcare professionals.

Setting

Participants with T2D were recruited from the ongoing Hoorn Diabetes Care System cohort in the West-Friesland area of the Netherlands. Additionally, people with T2D and advanced chronic kidney disease were recruited at the outpatient clinics of Amsterdam University Medical Centre and ‘Niercentrum aan de Amstel’, both in the Amsterdam area of the Netherlands. The healthcare professionals involved in the qualitative part were recruited at the Amsterdam University Medical Centre.

Participants

314 people with T2D (age 64.0±10.8 years, 63.7% men).

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Participants completed seven PROMIS CATs (assessing (1) Physical Function, (2) Pain Interference, (3) Fatigue, (4) Sleep Disturbance, (5) Anxiety, (6) Depression and (7) Ability to Participate in Social Roles and Activities), and PROMs measuring similar constructs. After 2 weeks and 6 months, participants completed the CATs measures again, together with seven Global Rating Scales (GRS) on perceived change in each domain. Construct validity was assessed using Pearson’s correlations. Test–retest reliability was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Measurement error was assessed by the standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC). Responsiveness was assessed by correlations between change scores on the PROMIS CAT and GRS. Acceptability was assessed through focus groups and interviews in healthcare providers and people with T2D.

Results

Except for Fatigue, all PROMIS CAT domains demonstrated sufficient construct validity, since ≥75% of the results was in accordance with a priori hypotheses. All seven PROMIS CATs showed sufficient test–retest reliability (ICCs 0.73–0.91). SEM and MDC ranged from 2.1 to 2.7 and from 5.7 to 7.4, respectively. Responsiveness was rated as insufficient in this study design as there was almost no change in participants’ own rating of their health compared with 6 months ago according to a global rating of change.

During the focus groups and interviews, healthcare providers and people with T2D agreed that CATs could serve as a conversation starter in routine care, but should never replace personal consultations with a doctor. If implemented, participants would be willing to spend 15 min to complete the PROMIS CATs.

Conclusions

The PROMIS CATs showed sufficient construct validity and test–retest reliability in most domains in people with T2D. Responsiveness needs to be evaluated in a population with poorer diabetes control or in a study design with longer follow-up. The CATs are well accepted to be used in care to identify relevant topics, but should not replace personal contact with the doctor.

☐ ☆ ✇ BMJ Open

Multiparametric MRI for local staging in patients with suspected muscle-invasive bladder cancer: study protocol for a multicentre, non-inferiority randomised controlled trial (the BladParadigm study)

Por: van Koeverden · S. W. · van Hoogstraten · L. M. · de Rooij · M. · van der Leest · M. · Grutters · J. P. · BladParadigm study group · Kiemeney · L. A. · van der Heijden · A. G. · Baars · Boellaard · Boormans · Bosboom · van den Bouwhuijsen · Dijkstra · Firanescu · Fütterer — Agosto 17th 2025 at 08:12
Introduction

Muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) is an aggressive type of cancer. About 50% of patients will die from the disease within 5 years despite radical treatment. This implies that in many patients, the disease has already spread at the time of radical treatment, even though imaging shows no signs of metastasis. We hypothesise that the standard local staging method, transurethral resection of the bladder tumour (TURBT), is partly responsible for tumour cell spread. Furthermore, TURBT (and re-TURBT in many patients) contributes to a significant delay to definitive therapy. The aim of this randomised study is to determine whether multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) of the bladder, in combination with a single outpatient bladder tumour biopsy for histological confirmation, is a safer, faster, less costly and, therefore, more cost-effective diagnostic pathway than TURBT to detect or rule out MIBC.

Methods and analysis

BladParadigm is a two-arm multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) conducted in the Netherlands. Over a 3-year period, patients with clinically suspected MIBC without evidence of metastases will be recruited and randomised 1:1 to either TURBT or 3-Tesla mpMRI with same-day outpatient bladder biopsy. The Vesical Imaging Reporting and Data System (VI-RADS) will be used to standardise mpMRI reporting. Patients will undergo definitive treatment based on the results of the TURBT or mpMRI. The study is powered to demonstrate that the mpMRI-based strategy is at least non-inferior to standard TURBT in patients treated with radical cystectomy alone, assuming a relative hazard of 0.55. The required sample size is 360 patients (180 TURBT, 180 mpMRI). The primary outcome is 2-year progression-free survival. Progression will be assessed by imaging, according to the current standard of care. Secondary outcome measures are time to definitive treatment, quality of life (EuroQol 5D-5L), healthcare costs and cost-effectiveness.

Ethics and dissemination

This study has received ethical approval from the Medical Ethical Committee Oost-Nederland (NL83685.091.23). All participants will provide written informed consent prior to inclusion. Findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed, open-access publications, presentations at scientific conferences and stakeholder briefings.

Trial registration number

NCT05779631.

❌