Delphi Procedure Research Articles

Developing a set of core items for assessing preparedness in Italy: a Delphi approach

Abstract Background Effective pandemic management relies on preparedness and several tools are available for evaluation. However, due to differences in regional healthcare organization and structures, these may not accurately evaluate Italy’s capacities. This study, part of a project funded by the Italian Ministry of Health, report on the development of an assessment tool capable of evaluating the preparedness to confront pandemics at the regional level based on the actions outlined by the Italian influenza pandemic plan. Methods A desk research was carried out for preparedness evaluation tools, consulting Public Health Agencies, and Google Scholar and Search. Tools evaluation items were extracted, associated with the Italian plan, and screened for relevance and data availability. Selected items were then subjected to a two-round Delphi procedure involving 18 stakeholders from academia, local health services, and national agencies. The agreement was assessed using a 10-point Likert scale, and defined as a mean score ≥8, and consensus as a score standard deviation (SD) ≤1.5. Items with mean score ≥ 8 and SD > 1.5 after the first round were sent to the second round. Results A total of 6 tools were included in the study, from which 303 evaluation items matched the actions of the plan. After the screening phase, 122 indicators were deemed relevant and potentially available and sent to the Delphi procedure. Eighteen (14.8%) items reached both agreement and consensus in the first round, while another fifteen (12.3%) after the second. The 33 items covered all the domains of the national plan, especially Research and Development (21.1%) and Clinical Governance (15.2%). Conclusions The development of a set of core items that are agile, relevant, and readily available was facilitated by the involvement of stakeholders from different sectors. Moreover, adherence to the Italian pandemic plan should ensure that these items are deeply integrated into the unique context of the Italian regions. Key messages • The Delphi process identified a narrow number of evaluation items with great consensus. • Consensus was searched involving stakeholders from central authorities, local units, and academia.

Management of low-level HIV viremia during antiretroviral therapy: Delphi consensus statement and appraisal of the evidence

ObjectiveWhile antiretroviral therapy (ART) is highly effective, detection of low levels of HIV-1 RNA in plasma is common in treated individuals. Given the uncertainties on the topic, we convened a...

Bicycle Set-Up Dimensions and Cycling Kinematics: A Consensus Statement Using Delphi Methodology.

Bicycle set-up dimensions and cycling kinematic data are important components of bicycle fitting and cyclist testing protocols. However, there are no guidelines on how bicycles should be measured and how kinematic data should be collected to increase the reliability of outcomes. This article proposes a consensus regarding bicycle set-up dimensions and recommendations for collecting cycling-related kinematic data. Four core members recruited panellists, prepared the document to review in each round for panellists, analysed the scores and comments of the expert panellists, reported the decisions and communicated with panellists. Fourteen experts with experience in research involving cycling kinematics and/or bicycle fitting agreed to participate as panellists. An initial list of 17 statements was proposed, rated using a five-point Likert scale and commented on by panellists in three rounds of anonymous surveys following a Delphi procedure. The consensus was agreed upon when more than 80% of the panellists scored the statement with values of 4 and 5 (moderately and strongly agree) with an interquartile range of less than or equal to 1. A consensus was achieved for eight statements addressing bicycle set-up dimensions (e.g. saddle height, saddle setback, etc.) and nine statements for cycling kinematic assessment (e.g. kinematic method, two-dimensional methodology, etc.). This consensus statement provides a list of recommendations about how bicycle set-up dimensions should be measured and the best practices for collecting cycling kinematic data. These recommendations should improve the transparency, reproducibility, standardisation and interpretation of bicycle measurements and cycling kinematic data for researchers, bicycle fitters and cycling related practitioners.

Using a modified Delphi procedure to select a PRO-CTCAE-based subset for patient-reported symptomatic toxicity monitoring in rectal cancer patients.

Standardized patient-reported outcomes (PRO) monitoring during and after rectal cancer treatment provides insight into treatment-related toxicities patients experience and improves health-related quality-of-life as well as overall survival. We aimed to select a subset of the PRO version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) for standardized monitoring of treatment-related symptomatic toxicities in rectal cancer. We used a mixed methods approach including a literature review, and semi-structured interviews with health care providers (HCPs) involved in rectal cancer care and rectal cancer patients. Results from literature and interviews were summarized and used in a modified Delphi procedure to select a PRO-CTCAE subset specific for rectal cancer. Twenty-six PRO-CTCAE symptomatic toxicities were identified from literature. Fifteen HCPs from multiple disciplines (medical, radiation and surgical oncology), and a heterogeneous group of fifteen rectal cancer patients treated with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and/or surgery, participated in semi-structured interviews. Ten HCPs (67%) and nine patients (90%) participated in the first Delphi round. The final selected PRO-CTCAE core-subset contained 16 symptomatic toxicities: 'diarrhea', 'fecal incontinence', 'constipation','bloating of the abdomen', 'pain in the abdomen', 'vomiting', 'decreased libido', 'pain during vaginal sex', 'ability to achieve and maintain erection', 'fatigue', 'anxiety', 'feeling that nothing could cheer you up', 'urinary incontinence', 'painful urination', 'general pain', and 'hand-foot syndrome'. Based on a comprehensive mixed methods study, a PRO-CTCAE subset for standardized treatment-related symptomatic toxicity monitoring in rectal cancer was identified. Assessment of the effectiveness and compliance of symptomatic toxicity monitoring using this subset is recommended.

The validation and assessment of a curriculum based GAIT App used in teaching bachelor of physiotherapy students: a cross sectional study

IntroductionThere has been an advent in the use of Mobile Apps in the academic space. The pandemic hastened their usage, and forced us to rapidly innovate in order to meet the educational needs of our students. Also, Mobile Apps have been known to facilitate self-learning, make it enjoyable, and personalize the pace of learning of the individual. Given the level of skill-learning in Physiotherapy education, the use of Mobile Apps can pose a challenge, as well as offer an opportunity to explore its scope to enhance learning, and create innovative pedagogic strategies. There are a very few learning mobile apps that have been assessed in Physiotherapy education.AimTo develop, establish content validity and internal consistency of a curriculum based App on the kinesiology of normal Gait for bachelor of physiotherapy students, and to evaluate the App with regards to use, quality, engagement, and overall experience.Materials & methodsIn the first phase, a mobile app based on a bachelor of physiotherapy Gait curriculum was developed and validated using Delphi procedure, with 80% agreement criteria, by a group of experts. Subsequently, the App was rated by 200 users on: engagement, aesthetics, information, subjective quality.ResultsThe content validity index following 2 rounds of Delphi was found to be 0.88. Also, therapists found the App easy to use, and 80% gave it a rating of > 3 stars.ConclusionCreating, designing, implementing, and evaluating the efficacy of a Gait App as a means to teaching the GAIT component to physiotherapy students was found to be appealing and beneficial.

The LEADING Guideline: Reporting Standards for Expert Panel, Best-Estimate Diagnosis, and Longitudinal Expert All Data (LEAD) Studies.

Accurate assessments of symptoms and illnesses are essential for health research and clinical practice but face many challenges. The absence of a single error-free measure is currently addressed by assessment methods involving experts reviewing several sources of information to achieve a more accurate or best-estimate assessment. Three bodies of work spanning medicine, psychiatry, and psychology propose similar assessment methods: The Expert Panel, the Best-Estimate Diagnosis, and the Longitudinal Expert All Data (LEAD) method. However, the quality of such best-estimate assessments is typically very difficult to evaluate due to poor reporting of the assessment methods and when they are reported, the reporting quality varies substantially. Here, we tackle this gap by developing reporting guidelines for such best-estimate assessment studies. The development of the reporting guidelines followed a four-stage approach: 1) drafting reporting standards accompanied by rationales and empirical evidence, which were further developed with a patient organization for depression, 2) incorporating expert feedback through a two-round Delphi procedure, 3) refining the guideline based on an expert consensus meeting, and 4) testing the guideline by i) having two researchers test it and ii) using it to examine the extent previously published studies report the standards. The last step also provides evidence for the need for the guideline: 10 to 63% (Mean = 33%) of the standards were not reported across thirty randomly selected studies. The LEADING guideline comprises 20 reporting standards related to four groups: The Longitudinal design (four standards); the Appropriate data (four standards); the Evaluation - experts, materials, and procedures (ten standards); and the Validity group (two standards). We hope that the LEADING guideline will be useful in assisting researchers in planning, conducting, reporting, and evaluating research aiming to achieve best-estimate assessments.

Structured hysteroscopic examination of uterine niches: a modified Delphi procedure.

Uterine niches in the Caesarean section scar are seen in approximately half of women with a history of caesarean delivery. Whilst a structured ultrasound assessment of caesarean defects has been described, there is no consensus on a structured hysteroscopic evaluation. To propose a methodology for a structured hysteroscopic evaluation of uterine niches. We conducted a modified Delphi procedure, including two online rounds and two face-to-face meetings of the members of the ESGE Uterine Niches Working Group. The taskforce members have extensive experience in hysteroscopic niche evaluation. The consensus was predefined as a Rate of Agreement of at least 75%. Thirteen experts participated in this modified Delphi procedure. There was consensus on the need for a standardised methodology and the hysteroscopic definition of a niche as any indentation in the myometrium at the site of a previous CS. There was consensus that a hysteroscopic evaluation of a niche must be combined with ultrasound to measure the residual myometrial thickness. In addition, it was agreed that niches should be subclassified as 'simple', 'simple with one branch', or 'complex'. There was consensus that the following items should be described during a hysteroscopic niche evaluation: the number of niches, the size in relation to the size of cervical canal, the presence of polyps, crypts, cysts, fibrotic tissue, blood, mucus, placental remnants, a dynamic valve, the appearance of the endometrium, the number of blood vessels and bleeding from blood vessels within the defect. Using a modified Delphi procedure with international experts, consensus was achieved on the hysteroscopic evaluation and classification of niches in the uterine caesarean section scar. A structured registration form was developed to aid consistency in hysteroscopic niche reporting.

Delphi studies in social and health sciences-Recommendations for an interdisciplinary standardized reporting (DELPHISTAR). Results of a Delphi study.

While different proposals exist for a guideline on reporting Delphi studies, none of them has yet established itself in the health and social sciences and across the range of Delphi variants. This seems critical because empirical studies demonstrate a diversity of modifications in the conduction of Delphi studies and sometimes even errors in the reporting. The aim of the present study is to close this gap and formulate a general reporting guideline. In an international Delphi procedure, Delphi experts were surveyed online in three rounds to find consensus on a reporting guideline for Delphi studies in the health and social sciences. The respondents were selected via publications of Delphi studies. The preliminary reporting guideline, containing 65 items on five topics and presented for evaluation, had been developed based on a systematic review of the practice of Delphi studies and a systematic review of existing reporting guidelines for Delphi studies. Starting in the second Delphi round, the experts received feedback in the form of mean values, measures of dispersion, a summary of the open-ended responses and their own response in the previous round. The final draft of the reporting guideline contains the items on which at least 75% of the respondents agreed by assigning scale points 6 and 7 on a 7-point Likert scale. 1,072 experts were invited to participate. A total of 91 experts completed the first Delphi round, 69 experts the second round, and 56 experts the third round. Of the 65 items in the first draft of the reporting guideline, consensus was ultimately reached for 38 items addressing the five topics: Title and Abstract (n = 3), Context (n = 7), Method (n = 20), Results (n = 4) and Discussion (n = 4). Items focusing on theoretical research and on dissemination were either rejected or remained subjects of dissent. We assume a high level of acceptance and interdisciplinary suitability regarding the reporting guideline presented here and referred to as the "Delphi studies in social and health sciences-recommendations for an interdisciplinary standardized reporting" (DELPHISTAR). Use of this reporting guideline can substantially improve the ability to compare and evaluate Delphi studies.

Development of quality indicators for hypertension, extractable from the electronic health record of the general practitioner: a rand-modified Delphi method

BackgroundHypertension, a chronic medical condition affecting millions of people worldwide, is a leading cause of cardiovascular diseases. A multidisciplinary approach is needed to reduce the burden of the disease, with general practitioners playing a vital role. Therefore, it is crucial that GPs provide high-quality care that is standardized and based on the most recent European guidelines. Quality indicators (QIs) can be used to assess the performance, outcomes, or processes of healthcare delivery and are critical in helping healthcare professionals identify areas of improvement and measure progress towards achieving desired health outcomes. However, QIs to evaluate the care of patients with hypertension in general practice have been studied to a limited extent. The aim of our study is to define quality indicators for hypertension in general practice that are extractable from the electronic health record (EHR) and can be used to evaluate and improve the quality of care for hypertensive patients in the general practice setting.MethodsWe used a Rand-modified Delphi procedure. We extracted recommendations from European guidelines and assembled them into an online questionnaire. An initial scoring based on the SMART principle and extractability from the EHR was performed by panel members, these results were analyzed using a Median Likert score, prioritization and degree of consensus. A consensus meeting was set up in which all the recommendations were discussed, followed by a final validation round.ResultsOur study extracted 115 recommendations. After analysis of the online questionnaire round and a consensus meeting round, 37 recommendations were accepted and 75 were excluded. Of these 37 recommendations, 9 were slightly modified and 4 were combined into 2 recommendations, resulting in a list of 35 recommendations. All recommendations of the final set were translated to QIs, made up of 7 QIs on screening, 6 QIs on diagnosis, 11 QIs on treatment, 5 QIs on outcome and 6 QIs on follow-up.ConclusionsOur study resulted in a set of 35 QIs for hypertension in general practice. These QIs, tailored to the Belgian EHR, provide a robust foundation for automated audit and feedback and could substantially benefit other countries if adapted to their systems.

Assessing Severity and Need for Delivery in Early Onset Preeclampsia Before 32 Weeks of Gestation: a Delphi Consensus Procedure.

Preeclampsia is a potentially life-threatening hypertensive pregnancy disorder that carries an acute risk of an unfavorable outcome of the pregnancy but also has consequences for the long-term health of the mother. Women who develop the early form of pre-eclampsia before the 32nd week of pregnancy have the highest risk and are also the most difficult to treat. The severity of pre-eclampsia is not characterized uniformly in Germany, so that the indication for delivery is rather individualized. The aim of this study was to reach a consensus on parameters that could serve as criteria for describing the severity of pre-eclampsia based on the urgency of delivery. To this end, a Delphi procedure was used to present a scenario in which a woman was admitted for preeclampsia before 32 gestational weeks and after completion of antenatal steroid therapy. Clinicians specialized in maternal-fetal medicine from German-speaking countries completed five rounds of a modified Delphi questionnaire. Presented parameters were selected by the section "Hypertensive Pregnancy Diseases and Fetal Growth Restriction" of the German Society of Gynecology and Obstetrics after reviewing the literature. These included objectifiable laboratory or clinical parameters as well as subjective symptoms of the patient. In addition, nine fetal parameters were taken into account. The clinicians were asked to rate presented parameters as an indication for delivery on a Likert scale from 0 to 4 (no indication to absolute indication without delay). For each item, the predefined cut-off for group consensus was ≥70% agreement. A total of 126 experts were approached. Sixty-nine experts (54.8%) took part in the first round; of those 50 completed the entire Delphi procedure. A consensus was reached on 14 parameters to be considered rapid preparation for delivery without delay (4 points on the Likert scale). These were among others hepatic hematoma or liver capsule rupture, acute liver failure with fulminant coagulation disorder or disseminated intravascular coagulation, eclampsia, pathologic findings in imaging (e.g. cMRI) or electrocardiogram arranged for new onset of headache or retrosternal pain, respectively. Twenty-six parameters were rated as factors that should be considered in the decision without being absolute (1 to 3 points), and 13 parameters should have no influence on the decision to deliver (0 points). No consensus on severe hypertension as an indication for delivery could be reached for blood pressure values below 220/140mmHg. A consensus was reached on whether to deliver in preeclampsia typic clinical findings and symptoms. The results can serve as guidance for current clinical practice and for the definition of clinical endpoints in intervention studies. Nevertheless, the isolated criteria are a theoretical construction since the combined deterioration or summation of several factors rather than a single factor most likely influences the decision to deliver and reflect the severity of preeclampsia. Moreover, the degree of hypertension as an indication for delivery remains controversial, unless the patient suffers additionally from complaints. Future research should be enforced to incorporate long-term risks for the mother into a decision aid.

Investigation of current guidelines for prescribing spectacles to children using a modified Delphi approach and the AGREE II tool.

This study aimed to identify clinical guidelines that provide recommendations on prescribing refractive error correction in children, evaluate the overall quality of these guidelines using the Appraisal of Guidelines for REsearch and Evaluation II (AGREE II) tool and subsequently gain consensus on the prescribing recommendations from high-quality guidelines using the modified Delphi technique. A comprehensive search for prescribing guidelines was conducted using databases and professional websites. The quality appraisal of eligible guidelines was undertaken by scoring the six AGREE II domains. Subsequently, the modified Delphi technique was used by 10 experts (sub-specialist optometrists, ophthalmologists and orthoptists) to gain consensus on the prescribing recommendation statements extracted from guidelines that had been identified as high quality. Three rounds were conducted in which agreement of these statements were scored using a 9-point Likert scale with a free-text option for any additional comments. Five eligible guidelines were identified. The AGREE II tool demonstrated that the guidelines varied substantially in quality, with only one guideline identified as being of high quality. A total of 168 prescribing statements were reviewed in the Delphi procedure. Of these, 95 statements reached expert consensus as being appropriate prescribing recommendations. There is significant scope for improving current guidelines for prescribing refractive error correction in children. We used the modified Delphi technique to find points of agreement on prescribing recommendations to support professionals prescribing refractive error correction in children. We recommend that further work is needed to address gaps in the guidelines.

P-776 School-age outcomes among IVF and ICSI -conceived children: a causal inference analysis using linked population-wide data

Abstract Study question What is the causal effect of method of oocyte insemination; standard in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), on childhood development at school entry? Summary answer The developmental outcomes at school entry for children conceived by ICSI, without severe male factor infertility, are equivalent to those conceived via standard IVF. What is known already Over 12 million children have been conceived globally with the assistance of assisted reproductive technology (ART). Within ART, ICSI continues to increase as the most common mode of oocyte insemination, even when not clearly indicated (i.e. without male factor infertility). Large cohort studies have suggested that ART, and ICSI in particular, may be associated with an increase in congenital abnormalities, autism spectrum disorder, developmental delay and intellectual disability. However, the studies are heterogenous and the evidence conflicting. The association between the ICSI technique itself and long-term childhood development remains unclear. Study design, size, duration Causal inference methods were used to analyse observational data in a way that emulates a target randomised clinical trial. For example, patients where standard IVF was not an option, (e.g., due to severe male factor infertility), were excluded. The state-wide cohort included linked maternal and childhood administrative data from Victoria, Australia. To eliminate potential confounding associated with IVF, comparison was made with children conceived via standard IVF (rather than conception without assistance). Participants/materials, setting, methods The study included singleton infants conceived via ART and born between 2005-2013. The primary exposure was conception via ICSI, with those born following conventional IVF insemination as controls. The outcome examined was the Australian Early Development Census (AEDC), a broad assessment of development and well-being performed in Australian schools, every triennium, at school entry (age 4-6). We combined multiple imputation and inverse probability weighting with regression adjustment to estimate population average causal effects. Main results and the role of chance The final cohort included 4,035 IVF and ICSI conceived children across the two outcome cohorts. Linked records were available for 2,468 ICSI children and 1,567 IVF-conceived controls. Maternal characteristics between the two treatment cohorts were similar for age, parity, education, language background, and number of eggs collected during treatment cycle. The ICSI conceived children were generally from residential areas of lower socio-economic status and conception was more likely to involve donated gametes. The unadjusted rate of the primary outcome; AEDC-defined “developmental vulnerability”, was 10.83% among the IVF group and 10.14% among the ICSI group. Given the use of observational data, there were missing data and inherent differences in the covariate profile between exposure cohorts. Multiple imputation, bootstrapping and doubly robust inverse probability weighted regression adjustment modelling was utilised to allow a causal interpretation of results. There was no evidence of a causal effect of ICSI-conception on the risk of AEDC-defined developmental vulnerability at school entry compared with spontaneously conceived children; adjusted risk difference -0.8% (95% CI -2.7% to 1.1%) and adjusted risk ratio 0.92 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.12). The adjustment variable set was determined a priori via a modified Delphi procedure. Limitations, reasons for caution Children who did not attend school due to severe disability were excluded, leading to potential selection bias. Within our study cohort of 2,468 ICSI children, no increased risk of developmental vulnerability was identified. It is possible that unmeasured confounders could have led to bias in estimating the treatment effects. Wider implications of the findings This study, in contrast to previous evidence, suggests that empiric use of ICSI compared with conventional IVF insemination does not affect early childhood developmental outcomes. These findings provide important reassurance for current and prospective parents, and clinicians alike. Trial registration number not applicable

Evaluation of appropriateness of antibiotic prescribing in primary healthcare institutions in China using proxy indicator

Our objectives were to develop a set of proxy indicators (PIs) suited for assessing antibiotic use appropriateness in China's primary healthcare institutions (PHIs), and assess performance scores of these PIs while exploring factors that influence the antibiotic appropriateness. We selected potential PIs for the PHIs through a RAND-modified Delphi procedure, and assessed clinimetric properties, focusing on measurability, applicability, and potential for improvement. PIs with favorable clinimetric properties were used to evaluate antibiotic prescription appropriateness by calculating performance scores of each PI. Institutions were categorized into three clusters representing different levels of appropriateness. We used the chi-square test and an ordinal logistic regression model at PHI level to explore factors influencing antibiotic appropriateness. Eighteen PIs were developed through two rounds of online surveys and one face-to-face meeting involving 20 stakeholders. All PIs met the clinimetric properties criteria and were used to analyze 209,662 antibiotic prescriptions across 269 PHIs. The percentage of PHIs meeting the target ranged from 3.1% to 69.3%, with 6 PIs below 10%. The appropriateness of antibiotic prescriptions was significantly associated with percentages of patients' gender of the PHIs. The varied and suboptimal performance of the PIs indicated the need for diverse efforts to enhance the rational antibiotic use at PHI level. It was necessary to devise distinct sets of PIs for diverse settings in future endeavors. This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant numbers 72374009, 81973294).

Defining a set of teaching EPAs tailored to an undergraduate medical curriculum using a modified Delphi approach

BackgroundThe concept of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) has recently been extended to operationalize professional tasks in teacher training and faculty development in health professions education. The aim of this study is to report on the process and results of defining a set of teaching EPAs (t-EPAs) tailored to the local characteristics of a particular undergraduate medical program.MethodsThe undergraduate medical program at the Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin is competency-based, integrates thematic modules and spans 6 years. A writing team identified teaching EPAs based on the program’s study regulations and drafted content descriptions with titles, specifications and knowledge, skills and attitudes. Content validation involved a modified Delphi procedure with a systematic, iterative interaction between a panel of content experts consisting of purposively selected educators and physicians from our faculty (n = 11) and the writing team. The threshold for a consensus was an agreement of 80% of the participants.ResultsAfter two Delphi rounds, a consensus was reached regarding the teaching activities to be included and their content descriptions. The response rate was 100% in both Delphi rounds. The Delphi results include the content descriptions of a total of 13 teaching EPAs, organized into the two overarching EPA domains of classroom-based (n = 10) and workplace-based (n = 3) activities. Tailoring the classroom EPAs to small group teaching and the workplace EPAs to supervising medical students led to several distinct EPAs. Another feature was the development of 2 teaching EPAs for interdisciplinary teaching.ConclusionsIn systematic, Delphi-based process, we defined a set of 13 distinct teaching EPAs tailored to a specific undergraduate medical program that cover the core teaching tasks for faculty in this program. Our report on the principles of the process and the results may guide other medical schools and educators in defining and tailoring teaching EPAs according to their contexts.

The Clinical Definition of Children With Medical Complexity: A Modified Delphi Study.

Children with medical complexity (CMC) comprise a subgroup of children with severe chronic diseases. A conceptual definition for CMC has been formulated, but there is no agreement on criteria to fulfill each of the 4 proposed domains: diagnostic conditions, functional limitations, health care use, and family-identified needs. Our objective with this study was to identify a standardized definition of CMC. Through a scoping review of the CMC literature, we identified potential criteria to fulfill each domain. These were incorporated into an electronic survey that was completed by a geographic and professionally varied panel of 81 American and Canadian respondents with expertise in managing CMC (response rate 70%) as part of a 4-iteration Delphi procedure. Respondents were asked to vote for the inclusion of each criterion in the definition, and for those with quantitative components (eg, hospitalization rates), to generate a consensus threshold value for meeting that criterion. The final criteria were analyzed by a committee and collapsed when situations of redundancy arose. Of 1411 studies considered, 132 informed 55 criteria for the initial survey, which was presented to 81 respondents. Consensus for inclusion was reached on 48 criteria and for exclusion on 1 criterion. The committee collapsed those 48 criteria into 39 final criteria, 1 for diagnostic conditions, 2 for functional limitations, 13 for health care use, and 23 for family needs. These results represent the first consensus-based, standardized definition of CMC. Standardized identification is needed to advance understanding of their epidemiology and outcomes, as well as to rigorously study treatment strategies and care models.

Core outcome Set for Cardio-oncology (COS-CO): development of a set of outcomes for the cardiovascular assessment and monitoring of cancer patients and survivors.

There is an increasing awareness of the evidence-based selection of outcomes to be measured in clinical trials and clinical practice. Currently, there is no core outcome set (COS) for cardio-oncology, which may hinder the (inter)national comparison of the effectiveness of research and the quality of cardio-oncology care. The aim of this study is to develop a standard and pragmatic patient-centred outcome set to assess and monitor cancer patients and survivors at risk of or with cardiovascular diseases. A list of outcome domains was generated through a review of registries and guidelines, and six patient interviews. The project team reviewed and refined the outcome domains prior to starting a two-round Delphi procedure conducted between January-June 2022. The panellists, including healthcare providers and researchers, were invited to rate the importance of the outcomes. 26 experts from 11 countries rated a list of 93 outcomes (round 1) and 63 outcomes (round 2) to gain consensus on a list of outcome measures, and of demographic factors, health status and treatment variables. The final COS includes 15 outcome measures, reflecting four core areas: life impact (n=2), pathophysiological manifestations (n=9), resource use/economic impact (n=1), and mortality/survival (n=3). Next, six demographic factors, 21 health status, three cardiovascular and nine cancer variables were included. This is the first international development of a COS for cardio-oncology. This set aims to facilitate (inter)national comparison in cardio-oncology care, using standardised parameters and meaningful patient-centred outcomes for research and quality of care assessments.

Fetal lower urinary tract obstruction: international Delphi consensus on management and core outcome set.

To reach an international expert consensus on the diagnosis, prognosis and management of fetal lower urinary tract obstruction (LUTO) by means of a Delphi procedure, and to use this to define a core outcome set (COS). A three-round Delphi procedure was conducted among an international panel of experts in fetal LUTO. The panel was provided with a list of literature-based parameters to consider for the diagnosis, prognosis, management and outcomes of LUTO. A parallel procedure was conducted with patient groups during the development of the COS. A total of 168 experts were approached, of whom 99 completed the first round and 80/99 (80.8%) completed all three rounds of the study questionnaires. Consensus was reached that, in the first trimester, an objective measurement of longitudinal bladder diameter of ≥ 7 mm should be used to suspect LUTO. In the second trimester, imaging parameters suggestive of LUTO could include enlarged bladder, keyhole sign, bladder wall thickening, bilateral hydronephrosis, bilateral hydroureteronephrosis and male sex. There was 79% agreement that the current prognostic scoring systems in the literature should not be used clinically. However, experts agreed on the value of amniotic fluid volume (at < 24 weeks) to predict survival and that the value of fetal intervention is to improve the chance of neonatal survival. Experts endorsed sonographic parameters suggestive of renal dysplasia, at least one vesicocentesis, and renal biochemistry for prognosis and counseling, but these items did not reach a consensus for determining candidacy for fetal intervention. On the other hand, imaging parameters suggestive of LUTO, absence of life-limiting structural or genetic anomalies, gestational age of ≥ 16 weeks and oligohydramnios (defined as deepest vertical pocket < 2 cm) should be used as candidacy criteria for fetal intervention based on expert consensus. If bladder refill was evaluated, it should be assessed subjectively. Vesicoamniotic shunt should be the first line of fetal intervention. In the presence of suspected fetal renal failure, serial amnioinfusion should be offered only as an experimental procedure under research protocols. A COS for future LUTO studies was agreed upon. International consensus on the diagnosis, prognosis and management of fetal LUTO, as well as the COS, should inform clinical care and research to optimize perinatal outcomes. © 2024 The Author(s). Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Attributes for a discrete-choice experiment on preferences of patients for oncology pharmacy consultations.

To ensure the safe use of oral anticancer drugs, oncology pharmacy consultations (OPCs) have been established in France. They are conditioned by the needs, expectations, and involvement of the patients in their care. Thus, it is essential to elicit their preferences. The discrete-choice experiment (DCE) is a method recommended by the ISPOR for such a task. The "selection and validation of attributes and their values" step is fundamental in this process. In this context, the aim of this study was to present our research approach to identify and validate the attributes that characterize an OPC and their values. Due to the lack of relevant published data in the literature, the focus-group method was used in accordance with good research practices for the application of conjoint-analysis of the ISPOR. The two-round Delphi method was used to validate the attributes and their values identified by the focus-group method. The focus-group method enabled identification of nine attributes. Thirty-seven healthcare professionals at a national level, including 30 pharmacists andseven physicians, were selected to take part in the Delphi procedure. Seven attributes (frequency, planification, operation mode, duration, content, written support, and report) and their values were thus validated. Based on these results, the next step will be to elicit patient preferences for OPCs and to then shed light on the issues of pharmaceutical support for patients by comparing their preferences with those of informal caregivers and, in particular, those of the healthcare professionals involved in their care.

Prospective diagnostic accuracy study of history taking and physical examination for adults with vertigo in general practice: study protocol

IntroductionVertigo is a prevalent and burdensome symptom. More than 80% of patients with vertigo are primarily treated by their general practitioner (GP) and are never referred to a medical specialist....

Recommendations for the specialist further training of nursing personnel on intensive care units in the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms: results of a modified Delphi procedure with experts

The medical development in the previous 15 years and the changes in treatment reality of the comprehensive elective treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms necessitate a re-evaluation of the quality assurance guidelines of the Federal Joint Committee in Germany (QBAA-RL). In the current version this requires a specialist further training quota for nursing personnel in intensive care wards of 50%. The quota was determined in 2008 based on expert opinions, although a direct empirical evidence base for this does not exist. Representatives from the fields of patient representation, physicians, nursing personnel and other relevant interface areas were invited to participate in a modified Delphi procedure. Following a comprehensive narrative literature search, a survey and focus group discussions with national and international experts, a total of three anonymized online-based voting rounds were carried out for which previously determined key statements were assessed with a 4‑point Likert scale (totally disagree up to totally agree). In addition, the expert panel had also defined a recommendation for a minimum quota for the specialist training of nursing personnel on intensive care wards in the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms, whereby an a priori agreement of 80% of the participants was defined as the consensus limit. Overall, 37 experts participated in the discussions and three successive voting rounds (participation rate 89%). The panel confirmed the necessity of a re-evaluation of the guideline recommendations and recommended the introduction of a shift-related minimum quota of 30% of the full-time equivalent of nursing personnel on intensive care wards and the introduction of structured promotional programs for long-term elevation of the quota. In this national Delphi procedure with medical and nursing experts as well as representatives of patients, the fundamental benefits and needs of professional specialist qualifications in the field of intensive care medicine were confirmed. The corresponding minimum quota for specialist further training of intensive care nursing personnel should generally apply without limitations to specific groups. The expert panel stipulates a shift-related minimum quota for intensive care nursing personnel with specialist training of 30% of the nursing personnel on intensive care wards and the obligatory introduction of structured and transparent promotion programs for the long-term enhancement.