Delphi consensus
Dotaz
Zobrazit nápovědu
IMPORTANCE: Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) is a rare but potentially fatal drug hypersensitivity reaction. To our knowledge, there is no international consensus on its severity assessment and treatment. OBJECTIVE: To reach an international, Delphi-based multinational expert consensus on the diagnostic workup, severity assessment, and treatment of patients with DRESS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Delphi method was used to assess 100 statements related to baseline workup, evaluation of severity, acute phase, and postacute management of DRESS. Fifty-seven international experts in DRESS were invited, and 54 participated in the survey, which took place from July to September 2022. MAIN OUTCOMES/MEASURES: The degree of agreement was calculated with the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. Consensus was defined as a statement with a median appropriateness value of 7 or higher (appropriate) and a disagreement index of lower than 1. RESULTS: In the first Delphi round, consensus was reached on 82 statements. Thirteen statements were revised and assessed in a second round. A consensus was reached for 93 statements overall. The experts agreed on a set of basic diagnostic workup procedures as well as severity- and organ-specific further investigations. They reached a consensus on severity assessment (mild, moderate, and severe) based on the extent of liver, kidney, and blood involvement and the damage of other organs. The panel agreed on the main lines of DRESS management according to these severity grades. General recommendations were generated on the postacute phase follow-up of patients with DRESS and the allergological workup. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This Delphi exercise represents, to our knowledge, the first international expert consensus on diagnostic workup, severity assessment, and management of DRESS. This should support clinicians in the diagnosis and management of DRESS and constitute the basis for development of future guidelines.
BACKGROUND: Data registries lack a definitive classification system that distinguishes different locations of colon cancer from one another. OBJECTIVE: To establish an international consensus on the definition of primary colon cancer segment locations. DESIGN: Between December 2022 and June 2023, the Delphi survey study was conducted to seek opinions from relevant international experts and eventually develop a consensus definition of each colon cancer segment. SETTING: Three-round online-based Delphi survey study. INTERVENTIONS: The online survey included 17 questions. In the first 2 rounds, participating experts were asked to rank each statement on a scale of 1 (least relevant) to 9 (most relevant). Consensus statements and definitions were revised according to the results for statements obtaining a consensus score of 7 to 9. During the third round and online meeting, definitions and statements that reached a moderate or high consensus (above 4 for more than 70% of participants) were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary goal of our project was focused on precisely localizing the specific segment affected by primary colon cancer rather than identifying surgical treatment or type of resection needed for a particular segment. RESULTS: The first round included 331 experts; 301 (91%) completed the second round and 295 (98%) completed the final round. Experts strongly supported the use of a "10-cm rule" to describe colon cancer sites at the flexures and anatomical landmarks for other segments. Regarding the definition of rectosigmoid cancer, experts from United States and Europe reached a high consensus that the term rectosigmoid as a colon cancer location must be abolished in contrast to experts from Asia. The description of overlapping segments of cancers achieved a consensus of 64%. LIMITATIONS: Subjective decisions are based on individual expert clinical experience. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi survey, the first internationally conducted consensus study, achieved a remarkable level of consensus among a panel of global experts. Ambiguity still exists regarding overlapping lesions. See Video Abstract . ESTANDARIZACIN DE LA DEFINICIN DE CADA SEGMENTO DE CNCER DE COLON CONSENSO DELPHI SOBRE LA TOMA DE DECISIONES CLNICAS PARA RESULTADOS ONCOLGICOS: ANTECEDENTES:Las bases de datos carecen de un sistema de clasificación definitivo que distinga las diferentes localizaciones del cáncer de colon.OBJETIVO:Establecer un consenso internacional sobre la definición de las localizaciones de los segmentos del cáncer de colon priamrio.DISEÑO:Entre diciembre de 2022 y junio de 2023, se realizó un estudio Delphi para recabar la opinión de expertos internacionales relevantes y, finalmente, desarrollar una definición consensuada de cada segmento del cáncer de colon.ESCENARIO:Estudio Delphi en línea de 3 rondas.INTERVENCIONES:La encuesta en línea incluyó 17 preguntas. En las dos primeras rondas, se pidió a los expertos participantes que calificaran cada afirmación en una escala del 1 al 9 (9 es la más relevante). Las afirmaciones y definiciones de consenso se revisaron según los resultados, obteniendo una puntuación de consenso de 7 a 9. Durante la tercera ronda y la reunión en línea, se incluyeron las definiciones y afirmaciones que alcanzaron un consenso moderado o alto (superior a 4 en más del 70 % de los participantes).MEDIDA PRINCIPALES DE RESULTADOS:El objetivo principal de nuestro proyecto se centró en localizar con precisión el segmento específico afectado por el cáncer de colon primario, en lugar de identificar el tratamiento quirúrgico o el tipo de resección necesario para un segmento en particular.RESULTADOS:La primera ronda incluyó a 331 expertos, 301 (91%) completaron la segunda ronda y 295 (98%) completaron la ronda final. Los expertos apoyaron firmemente el uso de una "regla de 10 cm" para describir las localizaciones del cáncer de colon en las flexuras y puntos de referencia anatómicos para otros segmentos. En cuanto a la definición de cáncer rectosigmoideo, expertos de América y Europa alcanzaron un alto consenso en la necesidad de abolir el término "rectosigmoide" como localización del cáncer de colon, a diferencia de los expertos de Asia. La descripción de los cánceres en segmentos que se superponen a alcanzó un consenso del 64%.LIMITACIONES:Las decisiones subjetivas se basan en la experiencia clínica individual de cada experto.CONCLUSIONES:Esta encuesta Delphi, el primer estudio de consenso realizado a nivel internacional, alcanzó un notable nivel de consenso entre un panel de expertos globales. Todavía existe ambigüedad en cuanto a las lesiones superpuestas. (Traducción-Dr. Jorge Silva Velazco ).
- MeSH
- delfská metoda MeSH
- klinické rozhodování * metody MeSH
- konsensus MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádory tračníku * patologie klasifikace diagnóza chirurgie MeSH
- průzkumy a dotazníky MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
Úvod a cíl: Terminologie adherence (resp. compliance) popisující chování pacienta směrem k farmakoterapii je v literatuře používána často nekonzistentně a roztříštěně. V anglickém originále proto vznikla tzv. ABC taxonomie za účelem klasifikace a sjednocení používaných pojmů. Cílem této práce bylo ustanovení prvotního konsenzuálního překladu české terminologie zabývající se problematikou užívání léčiv prostřednictvím Delphi metody. Metodika: V období od února do května 2021 proběhlo tříkolové anonymní on-line dotazníkové Delphi šetření. Dotazník obsahoval otázky na překlady sedmi pojmů a jejich definic vycházejících z ABC taxonomie, přičemž výsledný konsenzus byl ustanoven na základě předem definované míry shody respondentů. Výsledky: Ze 106 kontaktovaných panelistů různých zdravotnických profesí odpovědělo v prvním kole 46 (43,4 %). Dostatečného konsenzu (≥ 85 %) bylo dosaženo u překladů dvou definic. Ve druhém kole se 32 respondentům podařilo ustanovit konsenzuální znění (> 75 %) jednoho pojmu a čtyř definic. Na třetí kolo reagovalo 24 respondentů a pro všechny zbylé pojmy a definice ustanovilo mírný (> 50 %) až silný (> 95 %) konsenzus. Soubor pojmů souvisejících s užíváním léčiv ustanovený pro český jazyk byl následující: adherence k léčbě, zahájení léčby, zavedení léčby, přerušení léčby, setrvání na léčbě, management adherence a obory související s adherencí. Závěr: Ustanovení konsenzuálních překladů všech českých pojmů a definic souvisejících s adherencí k léčbě může přispět k větší harmonizaci a možnosti porovnání vědeckých prací i ke zlepšení komunikace mezi odbornou veřejností. Je však třeba tento konsenzus ještě potvrdit na větším počtu odborníků zabývajících se danou problematikou včetně zapojení odborných společností.
Background: The terminology of adherence (or compliance) describing the patient's medication taking behavior is often used inconsistently and fragmented in the literature. Therefore, the English original of so-called ABC Taxonomy was developed to classify and unify the terminology. The aim of this paper was to establish the first consensual translation of Czech terminology dealing with the issue of medication taking behavior using Delphi method. Methods: In the period from February to May 2021, a three-round anonymous online Delphi questionnaire survey was conducted. The questionnaire contained items for translations of seven terms and their definitions based on the ABC Taxonomy, while the resulting consensus was established by a predefined degree of agreement of the respondents. Results: Out of 106 contacted panelists representing different healthcare professions, 46 (43.4%) answered in the first round. Sufficient consensus (≥ 85%) was reached for the translation of two definitions. In the second round, 32 respondents managed to establish a consensus (> 75%) of one term and four definitions and 24 respondents in the third round established a mild (> 50%) to strong (> 95%) consensus for all remaining terms and definitions. The set of terms related to medication taking for the Czech language was as follows: adherence k léčbě, zahájení léčby, zavedení léčby, přerušení léčby, setrvání na léčbě, management adherence and obory související s adherencí. Conclusion: The consensual translations of all Czech terms and definitions related to medication adherence can contribute to greater harmonization and comparability of scientific papers as well as to enhance the communication between scientific and clinical community. However, this consensus needs to be confirmed by a larger number of experts dealing with adherence issue, including the involvement of professional societies.
INTRODUCTION: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide. Yet there is significant variation in practice concerning its various aspects. This paper report results from the first modified Delphi consensus-building exercise on SG. METHODS: We established a committee of 54 globally recognized opinion makers in this field. The committee agreed to vote on several statements concerning SG. An agreement or disagreement amongst ≥ 70.0% experts was construed as a consensus. RESULTS: The committee achieved a consensus of agreement (n = 71) or disagreement (n = 7) for 78 out of 97 proposed statements after two rounds of voting. The committee agreed with 96.3% consensus that the characterization of SG as a purely restrictive procedure was inaccurate and there was 88.7% consensus that SG was not a suitable standalone, primary, surgical weight loss option for patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) without dysplasia. There was an overwhelming consensus of 92.5% that the sleeve should be fashioned over an orogastric tube of 36-40 Fr and a 90.7% consensus that surgeons should stay at least 1 cm away from the angle of His. Remarkably, the committee agreed with 81.1% consensus that SG patients should undergo a screening endoscopy every 5 years after surgery to screen for BE. CONCLUSION: A multinational team of experts achieved consensus on several aspects of SG. The findings of this exercise should help improve the outcomes of SG, the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide, and guide future research on this topic.
- MeSH
- delfská metoda MeSH
- gastrektomie MeSH
- hmotnostní úbytek MeSH
- konsensus MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- morbidní obezita * chirurgie MeSH
- retrospektivní studie MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- žaludeční bypass * MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
Global obesity rates have risen dramatically, now exceeding deaths from starvation. Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), initially for severe obesity (BMI ≥35 kg/m2), is performed globally over 500 000 times annually, offering significant metabolic benefits beyond weight loss. However, varying eligibility criteria globally impact patient care and healthcare resources. Updated in 2022, ASMBS and IFSO guidelines aim to standardise MBS indications, reflecting current understanding and emphasising comprehensive preoperative assessments. Yet, clinical variability persists, necessitating consensus-based recommendations. This modified Delphi study engaged 45 global experts to establish consensus on perioperative management in MBS. Experts selected from bariatric societies possessed expertise in MBS and participated in a two-round Delphi protocol. Consensus was achieved on 90 of 169 statements (53.3%), encompassing multidisciplinary team composition, patient selection criteria, preoperative testing, and referral pathways. The agreement highlighted the critical role of comprehensive preoperative assessments and the integration of healthcare professionals in MBS. These findings offer essential insights to standardise perioperative practices and advocate for evidence-based guidelines in MBS globally. The study underscores the need for unified protocols to optimise outcomes and guide future research in MBS.
Social prescribing has become a global phenomenon. A Delphi study was recently conducted with 48 social prescribing experts from 26 countries to establish global agreement on the definition of social prescribing. We reflect on the use and utility of the outputs of this work, and where we go from here.
- MeSH
- delfská metoda * MeSH
- konsensus * MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- dopisy MeSH
Face transplantation is a viable reconstructive approach for severe craniofacial defects. Despite the evolution witnessed in the field, ethical aspects, clinical and psychosocial implications, public perception, and economic sustainability remain the subject of debate and unanswered questions. Furthermore, poor data reporting and sharing, the absence of standardized metrics for outcome evaluation, and the lack of consensus definitions of success and failure have hampered the development of a "transplantation culture" on a global scale. We completed a 2-round online modified Delphi process with 35 international face transplant stakeholders, including surgeons, clinicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, ethicists, policymakers, and researchers, with a representation of 10 of the 19 face transplant teams that had already performed the procedure and 73% of face transplants. Themes addressed included patient assessment and selection, indications, social support networks, clinical framework, surgical considerations, data on patient progress and outcomes, definitions of success and failure, public image and perception, and financial sustainability. The presented recommendations are the product of a shared commitment of face transplant teams to foster the development of face transplantation and are aimed at providing a gold standard of practice and policy.
- MeSH
- delfská metoda MeSH
- konsensus MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- transplantace obličeje * metody MeSH
- vaskularizovaná kompozitní alotransplantace * MeSH
- výzkumný projekt MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
Face transplantation is a viable reconstructive approach for severe craniofacial defects. Despite the evolution witnessed in the field, ethical aspects, clinical and psychosocial implications, public perception, and economic sustainability remain the subject of debate and unanswered questions. Furthermore, poor data reporting and sharing, the absence of standardized metrics for outcome evaluation, and the lack of consensus definitions of success and failure have hampered the development of a "transplantation culture" on a global scale. We completed a 2-round online modified Delphi process with 35 international face transplant stakeholders, including surgeons, clinicians, psychologists, psychiatrists, ethicists, policymakers, and researchers, with a representation of 10 of the 19 face transplant teams that had already performed the procedure and 73% of face transplants. Themes addressed included patient assessment and selection, indications, social support networks, clinical framework, surgical considerations, data on patient progress and outcomes, definitions of success and failure, public image and perception, and financial sustainability. The presented recommendations are the product of a shared commitment of face transplant teams to foster the development of face transplantation and are aimed at providing a gold standard of practice and policy.
- MeSH
- delfská metoda MeSH
- konsensus MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- transplantace obličeje * metody MeSH
- vaskularizovaná kompozitní alotransplantace * MeSH
- výzkumný projekt MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
BACKGROUND: Poly (ADP ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPis) are a treatment option for patients with advanced high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian carcinoma (OC). Recent guidelines have clarified how homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) may influence treatment decision-making in this setting. As a result, numerous companion diagnostic assays (CDx) have been developed to identify HRD. However, the optimal HRD testing strategy is an area of debate. Moreover, recently published clinical and translational data may impact how HRD status may be used to identify patients likely to benefit from PARPi use. We aimed to extensively compare available HRD CDx and establish a worldwide expert consensus on HRD testing in primary and recurrent OC. METHODS: A group of 99 global experts from 31 different countries was formed. Using a modified Delphi process, the experts aimed to establish consensus statements based on a systematic literature search and CDx information sought from investigators, companies and/or publications. RESULTS: Technical information, including analytical and clinical validation, were obtained from 14 of 15 available HRD CDx (7 academic; 7 commercial). Consensus was reached on 36 statements encompassing the following topics: 1) the predictive impact of HRD status on PARPi use in primary and recurrent OC; 2) analytical and clinical validation requirements of HRD CDx; 3) resource-stratified HRD testing; and 4) how future CDx may include additional approaches to help address unmet testing needs. CONCLUSION: This manuscript provides detailed information on currently available HRD CDx and up-to-date guidance from global experts on HRD testing in patients with primary and recurrent OC.
- MeSH
- delfská metoda MeSH
- homologní rekombinace MeSH
- konsensus * MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nádorové biomarkery genetika MeSH
- nádory vaječníků * genetika diagnóza farmakoterapie MeSH
- PARP inhibitory * terapeutické užití MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- srovnávací studie MeSH
INTRODUCTION: Current literature lacks consensus on initial assessments and routine follow-up care of patients with alpha-mannosidosis (AM). A Delphi panel was conducted to generate and validate recommendations on best practices for initial assessment, routine follow-up care, and integrated care coordination of patients with AM. METHODS: A modified Delphi method involving 3 rounds of online surveys was used. An independent administrator and 2 nonvoting physician co-chairs managed survey development, anonymous data collection, and analysis. A multidisciplinary panel comprising 20 physicians from 12 countries responded to 57 open-ended questions in the first survey. Round 2 consisted of 11 ranking questions and 44 voting statements. In round 3, panelists voted to validate 60 consensus statements. The panel response rate was ≥95% in all 3 rounds. Panelists used 5-point Likert scales to indicate importance (score of ≥3) or agreement (score of ≥4). Consensus was defined a priori as ≥75% agreement with ≥75% of panelists voting. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 60 statements, encompassing 3 key areas: initial assessments, routine follow-up care, and treatment-related follow-up. The panel agreed on the type and frequency of assessments related to genetic testing, baseline evaluations, quality of life, biochemical measures, affected body systems, treatment received, and integrated care coordination in patients with AM. Forty-nine statements reached 90% to 100% consensus, 8 statements reached 80% to 85% consensus, and 1 statement reached 75% consensus. Two statements each reached consensus on 15 baseline assessments to be conducted at the initial follow-up visit after diagnosis in pediatric and adult patients. CONCLUSION: This is the first Delphi study providing internationally applicable, best-practice recommendations for monitoring patients with AM that may improve their care and well-being.
- MeSH
- alfa-mannosidóza * terapie diagnóza MeSH
- delfská metoda * MeSH
- integrované poskytování zdravotní péče normy MeSH
- konsensus * MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- průzkumy a dotazníky MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
