Cancer medicine · 2025
Implementation of a Personalized Risk Model for Lymph Node Metastasis in Endometrial Carcinoma: Healthcare Providers' Perspectives on Use, Barriers, and Facilitators.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lombaers Marike S, Vrede Stephanie W, Reijnen Casper, Boll Dorry, Visser Nicole C M, Pijnenborg Johanna M A, Ezendam Nicole P M, Hermens Rosella P M G
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The ENDORISK model estimates the risk of lymph node metastases (LNM) in endometrial carcinoma (EC) patients using preoperative clinical variables and biomarkers. This qualitative study investigated healthcare providers' (HCP) perspectives on the use of the model and barriers and facilitators for clinical implementation.
METHODS: Eight focus group interviews were performed among HCPs. A semi-structured interview guide was used based on the Grol and Wensing implementation model.
RESULTS: Focus groups included gynecologists, residents of gynecology, pathologists, radiation oncologists, and a nurse specialist (n = 41). ENDORISK was deemed supportive for counseling of patients and shared decision-making for optimal surgical and adjuvant treatment. Barriers for implementation were difficulty in explaining the model and risk percentages to patients, differences in preoperative diagnostic tools used per hospital, and use of the model with the sentinel node procedure. Facilitators were a clear guideline for using the model with a predefined risk cutoff and making the model easily understandable for patients. A 10% risk cutoff was considered clinically relevant for lymph node assessment.
CONCLUSION: HCP found ENDORISK use in clinical practice supportive for patient counseling. Future implementation should focus on a user-friendly interface, a cohesive guideline, and training to aid efficient use and counseling of patients.
METHODS: Eight focus group interviews were performed among HCPs. A semi-structured interview guide was used based on the Grol and Wensing implementation model.
RESULTS: Focus groups included gynecologists, residents of gynecology, pathologists, radiation oncologists, and a nurse specialist (n = 41). ENDORISK was deemed supportive for counseling of patients and shared decision-making for optimal surgical and adjuvant treatment. Barriers for implementation were difficulty in explaining the model and risk percentages to patients, differences in preoperative diagnostic tools used per hospital, and use of the model with the sentinel node procedure. Facilitators were a clear guideline for using the model with a predefined risk cutoff and making the model easily understandable for patients. A 10% risk cutoff was considered clinically relevant for lymph node assessment.
CONCLUSION: HCP found ENDORISK use in clinical practice supportive for patient counseling. Future implementation should focus on a user-friendly interface, a cohesive guideline, and training to aid efficient use and counseling of patients.