To explore existing qualitative research on patients’ experiences from the onset of symptoms to the diagnosis of sarcoma, with the purpose of identifying patient-perceived barriers at both patient and healthcare system levels and to highlight opportunities for improvement.

Systematic review of qualitative studies using thematic synthesis.

We systematically searched Medline [Ovid], Embase [Ovid], PsycINFO [EBSCOhost] and CINAHL [EBSCOhost] from database inception to 11 April 2025 for qualitative studies reporting sarcoma patients’ experiences during their diagnostic trajectory. The final search was conducted on 11 April 2025. All articles were screened against predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria and methodological quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative checklist. Six studies conducted in Australia, the Netherlands and the UK were included. Data were analysed using a thematic synthesis approach guided by Thomas and Harden (2008). Confidence in the synthesised findings was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation - Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERqual) approach.

Four overarching themes emerged: patients’ experience and interpretation of symptoms, diagnostic pathways, healthcare system factors, and reflections and recommendations. Key contributors to delayed diagnosis were symptom normalisation, misattribution by both patients and healthcare professionals, limited continuity of care and communication challenges. These findings were consistent across multiple countries, indicating relevance and validity in many settings. Patients emphasised the importance of disease awareness, persistence of patients and coordinated care.

Diagnostic delays in sarcoma are influenced by both patient and healthcare systemic factors. Addressing these factors requires increased disease awareness among healthcare professionals and the public, improved coordination within the healthcare system, and targeted research to guide future interventions. This review provides cross-country insights into barriers to early sarcoma diagnosis, informing future priorities in clinical practice and research.

CRD420251030726.

Communication is a professional competence that all paediatric healthcare professionals must learn and maintain to provide age and developmentally appropriate care. Child-centred communication encourages direct communication with children and adolescents, incorporating the use of play as a communicative strategy. Still, many paediatric healthcare professionals receive little or no formal training in communication and play. A critical barrier to communication training is the limited possibilities for healthcare professionals to take time from their clinical duties. Moreover, few randomised controlled trials have evaluated educational programmes on communication and play for paediatric healthcare professionals, and existing programmes vary significantly in design and duration. This study aims to compare the effects of a 45-min and a 3-hour educational intervention for healthcare professionals on age-appropriate communication and the use of play in clinical paediatric practice.

We will describe a single-centre, randomised, controlled, two-arm, non-inferiority trial. We will recruit 150 healthcare professionals with different professional backgrounds who will be randomised to one of two arms: a 45-min or 3-hour educational intervention on communication and play in paediatric clinical practice. The primary outcome will be their self-efficacy in patient-centredness at 12-week post-intervention, while secondary outcomes will be self-efficacy immediately after the intervention, motivation to engage in the educational activity, cognitive load, self-evaluated knowledge, satisfaction and the impact on individual practice and training needs. Data will be collected through questionnaires at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and 12 weeks post-intervention and will be analysed using linear mixed models with random effects to account for clustering and within-subject correlation.

The Danish Data Protection Agency approved the study (P-2020–1144), which will be conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed open-access scientific journal and presented at international conferences.

NCT06859632 (ClinicalTrials.gov).