RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method Research Articles

Measuring the Maturity of Integrated Care in Singapore with the SCIROCCO Exchange Tool.

How have we progressed and where are the gaps of integrated care in Singapore? Social-health care provision in the context of an ageing population is critical in the city-state's management of the unprecedented demand as the proportion of seniors with multiple complex medical needs have almost doubled in the past decade. This study measures the maturity level of Singapore's integrated care, identifies key gaps and discusses their implications using the SCIROCCO Exchange tool, an online self-assessment tool consisting of the 12 dimensions necessary for the provision of integrated care. A three-step mixed method Delphi study was used to derive expert consensus. Participants across the social-healthcare sector as well as representatives from all three public healthcare delivery networks with at least five years of experience were included. Participants rated each of the twelve dimensions of the SCIROCCO Exchange tool on a six-point ordinal scale and provided justifications for each rating. Criteria from the RAND UCLA appropriateness method and thematic analysis were adopted for the analysis. All participants completed the study. The study found five dimensions in the "Initial" maturity level and five dimensions in the "Progressing" maturity level. There were two dimensions which were "Uncertain" because of split responses, possibly due to their differing vantage points and conceptualisations of integrated care. The overall medians were plotted on a spider diagram. The absence of a systematic approach for integrated care was the most common subtheme across all dimensions. This is foundational for integrated care as this would enable stakeholders across health and social care to identify with a common goal. The findings emphasise the imperative to reshape social-health care delivery by focusing on foundational dimensions (such as structure, governance and citizen empowerment) to enable progress in other dimensions. Following the conclusion of this study, Singapore initiated a primary care reform with the launch of Healthier SG in July 2023. Future research may wish to explore the impact of Healthier SG on maturity of integrated care in Singapore.

Quality Indicators for Transition from Pediatric to Adult Care for Youth With Chronic Conditions: Proposal for an Online Modified Delphi Study.

The transition from pediatric to adult care poses a significant health system-level challenge impeding the delivery of quality health services for youth with chronic health conditions. In Canada and globally, the transition to adult care is regarded as a top priority in adolescent health in need of readily applicable, adaptable, and relevant national metrics to evaluate and benchmark transition success across disease populations and clinical care settings. Unfortunately, existing literature fails to account for the lack of engagement from youth and caregivers in developing indicators, and its applicability across chronic conditions, primary care involvement, and health equity considerations. Our proposed study aims to establish a consensus-driven set of quality indicators for the transition to adult care that are universally applicable across physical, developmental, and mental health conditions, clinical care settings, and health jurisdictions. Using an integrated knowledge translation (iKT) approach, a panel comprising youth, caregivers, interdisciplinary health care providers, and health system leaders will be established to collaborate with our research team to ensure that the study methodology, materials, and knowledge dissemination are suitable and reflect the perspectives of youth and their families. We will then conduct an iterative 3-round Online Modified Delphi (OMD) study (n=160) to (1) compare and contrast the perspectives of youth, caregivers, health care providers, and health system leaders on quality indicators for transition; and (2) prioritize a key set of quality indicators for transition applicable across disease populations that are the most important, useful, and feasible in the Canadian context. Using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) multistage analytic approach, data from each panel and stakeholder group will be examined separately and compared to establish a key set of indicators endorsed by both panels. The study is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Physicians Services Incorporated. This study will produce quality indicators to evaluate and inform action equitably to improve transition from pediatric to adult care for youth and their families in Canada. PRR1-10.2196/60860.

Utility of RAND/UCLA appropriateness method in validating multiple-choice questions on ECG

ObjectivesThis study aimed to investigate the utility of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method (RAM) in validating expert consensus-based multiple-choice questions (MCQs) on electrocardiogram (ECG).MethodsAccording to the RAM user’s manual, nine panelists comprising various experts who routinely handle ECGs were asked to reach a consensus in three phases: a preparatory phase (round 0), an online test phase (round 1), and a face-to-face expert panel meeting (round 2). In round 0, the objectives and future timeline of the study were elucidated to the nine expert panelists with a summary of relevant literature. In round 1, 100 ECG questions prepared by two skilled cardiologists were answered, and the success rate was calculated by dividing the number of correct answers by 9. Furthermore, the questions were stratified into “Appropriate,” “Discussion,” or “Inappropriate” according to the median score and interquartile range (IQR) of appropriateness rating by nine panelists. In round 2, the validity of the 100 ECG questions was discussed in an expert panel meeting according to the results of round 1 and finally reassessed as “Appropriate,” “Candidate,” “Revision,” and “Defer.”ResultsIn round 1 results, the average success rate of the nine experts was 0.89. Using the median score and IQR, 54 questions were classified as “ Discussion.” In the expert panel meeting in round 2, 23% of the original 100 questions was ultimately deemed inappropriate, although they had been prepared by two skilled cardiologists. Most of the 46 questions categorized as “Appropriate” using the median score and IQR in round 1 were considered “Appropriate” even after round 2 (44/46, 95.7%).ConclusionsThe use of the median score and IQR allowed for a more objective determination of question validity. The RAM may help select appropriate questions, contributing to the preparation of higher-quality tests.

Radiofrequency for chronic lumbosacral and cervical pain: Results of a consensus study using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.

Despite the routine use of radiofrequency (RF) for the treatment of chronic pain in the lumbosacral and cervical region, there remains uncertainty on the most appropriate patient selection criteria. This study aimed to develop appropriateness criteria for RF in relation to relevant patient characteristics, considering RF ablation (RFA) for the treatment of chronic axial pain and pulsed RF (PRF) for the treatment of chronic radicular pain. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RUAM) was used to explore the opinions of a multidisciplinary European panel on the appropriateness of RFA and PRF for a variety of clinical scenarios. Depending on the type of pain (axial or radicular), the expert panel rated the appropriateness of RFA and PRF for a total of 219 clinical scenarios. For axial pain in the lumbosacral or cervical region, appropriateness of RFA was determined by the dominant pain trigger and location of tenderness on palpation with higher appropriateness scores if these variables were suggestive of the diagnosis of facet or sacroiliac joint pain. Although the opinions on the appropriateness of PRF for lumbosacral and cervical radicular pain were fairly dispersed, there was agreement that PRF is an appropriate option for well-selected patients with radicular pain due to herniated disc or foraminal stenosis, particularly in the absence of motor deficits. The panel outcomes were embedded in an educational e-health tool that also covers the psychosocial aspects of chronic pain, providing integrated recommendations on the appropriate use of (P)RF interventions for the treatment of chronic axial and radicular pain in the lumbosacral and cervical region. A multidisciplinary European expert panel established patient-specific recommendations that may support the (pre)selection of patients with chronic axial and radicular pain in the lumbosacral and cervical region for either RFA or PRF (accessible via https://rftool.org). Future studies should validate these recommendations by determining their predictive value for the outcomes of (P)RF interventions.

Assembling a population health management maturity index using a Delphi method

BackgroundAlthough local initiatives commonly express a wish to improve population health and wellbeing using a population health management (PHM) approach, implementation is challenging and existing tools have either a narrow focus or lack transparency. This has created demand for practice-oriented guidance concerning the introduction and requirements of PHM.MethodsExisting knowledge from scientific literature was combined with expert opinion obtained using an adjusted RAND UCLA appropriateness method, which consisted of six Dutch panels in three Delphi rounds, followed by two rounds of validation by an international panel.ResultsThe Dutch panels identified 36 items relevant to PHM, in addition to the 97 items across six elements of PHM derived from scientific literature. Of these 133 items, 101 were considered important and 32 ambiguous. The international panel awarded similar scores for 128 of 133 items, with only 5 items remaining unvalidated. Combining literature and expert opinion gave extra weight and validity to the items.DiscussionIn developing a maturity index to help assess the use and progress of PHM in health regions, input from experts counterbalanced a previous skewedness of item distribution across the PHM elements and the Rainbow Model of Integrated Care (RMIC). Participant expertise also improved our understanding of successful PHM implementation, as well as how the six PHM elements are best constituted in a first iteration of a maturity index. Limitations included the number of participants in some panels and ambiguity of language. Further development should focus on item clarity, adoption in practice and item interconnectedness.ConclusionBy employing scientific literature enriched with expert opinion, this study provides new insight for both science and practice concerning the composition of PHM elements that influence PHM implementation. This will help guide practices in their quest to implement PHM.

Scientific consensus-building to promote the link between science and public policy

Consensus, defined as the position on which most scientists specialized in a given field agree at a given time, is a key aspect in increasing the readability, credibility and, ultimately, the use of scientific knowledge in public (evidence-based health policy). This article presents several methods aiming at developing scientific consensus between experts, such as the conventional or rapid Delphi approach, the nominal group technique, the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method and the consensus development conference. These methods are used to synthesize expert judgements when uncertainties persist in the literature - each with its own specificities in terms of duration, number of steps and expert participants enlisted, as well as the ways in which they are involved.

Development of Diagnostic Quality Metrics for Prosthetic Joint Infection.

Although well-accepted clinical practice guidelines exist for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection (PJI), little is known about the quality of diagnosis for PJI. The identification of quality gaps in the diagnosis of PJI would facilitate the development of care structures and processes to shorten time to diagnosis and reduce the significant morbidity, mortality, and economic burden associated with this condition. Hence, we sought to develop valid clinical quality measures to improve the timeliness and accuracy of PJI diagnosis. We convened a nine-member multidisciplinary national panel of PJI experts including orthopedic surgeons, infectious disease specialists, an emergency medicine physician, and a patient previously treated for PJI to review, discuss, and rate the validity of proposed measures using a modification of the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method. In total, 57 permutations of six proposed measures were rated. Populations considered to be at high enough risk for PJI that certain care processes should always be performed were identified by the panel. Among the proposed quality measures, the panel rated five as valid. These novel clinical quality measures could provide insight into care gaps in the diagnosis of PJI.

Facilitators and barriers of appropriate and timely initiation of intravenous fluids in patients with sepsis in emergency departments: a consensus development Delphi study

BackgroundSepsis is a life-threatening medical emergency in which appropriate and timely administration of intravenous fluids to patients with features of hypotension is critical to prevent multi-organ failure and subsequent death. However, compliance with recommended fluid administration is reported to be poor. There is a lack of consensus among emergency clinicians on some of the determinant factors influencing fluid administration in sepsis. Thus, the aim of this study was to identify the level of consensus among key stakeholders in emergency departments regarding the facilitators, barriers, and strategies to improve fluid administration.MethodsThe modified Delphi questionnaire with 23 statements exploring barriers, facilitators, and strategies to improve fluid administration was developed from the integration of findings from previous phases of the study involving emergency department clinicians. A two-round modified Delphi survey was conducted among key stakeholders with managerial, educational, supervision and leadership responsibilities using a “Reactive Delphi technique” from March 2023 to June 2023. The statements were rated for importance on a 9-point Likert scale. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) was used to identify the level of consensus (agreement/disagreement).ResultsOf the 21 panellists who completed Round 1 survey, 18 (86%) also completed Round 2. The panellists rated 9 out of 10 (90%) barriers, 3 out of 4 (75%) facilitators and all 9 (100%) improvement strategies as important. Out of the total 23 statements, 18 (78%) had agreement among the panellists. Incomplete vital signs at triage (Median = 9, IQR 7.25 to 9.00) as a barrier, awareness of importance of fluid administration in sepsis (Median = 9, IQR 8.00 to 9.00) as facilitator and provision of nurse-initiated intravenous fluids (Median = 9, IQR 8.00 to 9.00) as an improvement strategy were the highest rated statements.ConclusionThis is the first Delphi study identifying consensus on facilitators, barriers, and strategies to specifically improve intravenous fluid administration in sepsis in Australia. We identified 18 consensus-based factors associated with appropriate and timely administration of intravenous fluids in sepsis. This study offers empirical evidence to support the implementation of the identified strategies to improve patient outcomes.

French community grid for the evaluation of radiological artificial intelligence solutions (DRIM France Artificial Intelligence Initiative)

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to validate a national descriptive and analytical grid for artificial intelligence (AI) solutions in radiology. Materials and methodsThe RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method was chosen by expert radiologists from the DRIM France IA group for this statement paper. The study, initiated by the radiology community, involved seven steps including literature review, template development, panel selection, pre-panel meeting survey, data extraction and analysis, second and final panel meeting, and data reporting. ResultsThe panel consisted of seven software vendors, three for bone fracture detection using conventional radiology and four for breast cancer detection using mammography. A consensus was reached on various aspects, including general target, main objective, certification marking, integration, expression of results, forensic aspects and cybersecurity, performance and scientific validation, description of the company and economic details, possible usage scenarios in the clinical workflow, database, specific objectives and targets of the AI tool. ConclusionThe study validates a descriptive and analytical grid for radiological AI solutions consisting of ten items, using breast cancer and bone fracture as an experimental guide. This grid would assist radiologists in selecting relevant and validated AI solutions. Further developments of the grid are needed to include other organs and tasks.

Development of practice-based quality indicators for the primary care of older adults: a RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method study protocol

IntroductionOlder adults have high rates of primary care utilisation, and quality primary care has the potential to address their complex medical needs. Family physicians have different levels of knowledge and...

Management of anterior cruciate ligament revision in adults: the 2022 ESSKA consensus part III-indications for different clinical scenarios using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method.

The aim of the ESSKA 2022 consensus Part III was to develop patient-focused, contemporary, evidence-based, guidelines on the indications for revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery (ACLRev). The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) was used to provide recommendations on the appropriateness of surgical treatment versus conservative treatment in different clinical scenarios based on current scientific evidence in conjunction with expert opinion. A core panel defined the clinical scenarios with a moderator and then guided a panel of 17 voting experts through the RAM tasks. Through a two-step voting process, the panel established a consensus as to the appropriateness of ACLRev for each scenario based on a nine-point Likert scale (in which a score in the range 1-3 was considered 'inappropriate', 4-6 'uncertain', and 7-9 'appropriate'). The criteria used to define the scenarios were: age (18-35years vs 36-50years vs 51-60years), sports activity and expectation (Tegner 0-3 vs 4-6 vs 7-10), instability symptoms (yes vs no), meniscus status (functional vs repairable vs non-functional meniscus), and osteoarthritis (OA) (Kellgren-Lawrence [KL] grade 0-I-II vs grade III). Based on these variables, a set of 108 clinical scenarios was developed. ACLRev was considered appropriate in 58%, inappropriate in 12% (meaning conservative treatment is indicated), and uncertain in 30%. Experts considered ACLRev appropriate for patients with instability symptoms, aged ≤ 50years, regardless of sports activity level, meniscus status, and OA grade. Results were much more controversial in patients without instability symptoms, while higher inappropriateness was related to scenarios with older age (51-60years), low sporting expectation, non-functional meniscus, and knee OA (KL III). This expert consensus establishes guidelines as to the appropriateness of ACLRev based on defined criteria and provides a useful reference for clinical practice in determining treatment indications. II.

Protocol for development of an assessment tool for competency of ECG interpretation: expert consensus by the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method and cross-sectional testing using multidimensional item response theory

IntroductionAlthough the ECG is an important diagnostic tool in medical practice, the competency of ECG interpretation is considered to be poor. Diagnostic inaccuracy involving the misinterpretation of ECG can lead...

Multistakeholder Perspectives on Interventions to Support Youth During Mental Health Boarding.

To identify and prioritize opportunities to improve the psychiatric boarding experience for youth awaiting admission or transfer to inpatient psychiatric care. This study utilized an exploratory mixed methods design. The study team convened multidisciplinary stakeholder focus groups to discuss proposed hospital-based solutions to mental health boarding, potential psychosocial interventions deliverable during boarding, and outcomes measurement. Focus group responses were transcribed and analyzed to extract themes pertaining to these improvement opportunities. These results informed a follow-up survey which was then sent to the stakeholders to rate the feasibility and importance of modifications using a modified RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. Qualitative analyses revealed 9 themes across 2 domains related to psychiatric boarding care: in-hospital improvements and transitions of care. The follow-up survey identified 6 improvement opportunities rated as both feasible and important. Additionally, 6 psychosocial interventions, 2 delivery modalities, and 5 outcomes were rated as both feasible and important. Stakeholders concerned with the psychiatric boarding of youth identified numerous opportunities for improving the boarding process within 2 domains of in-hospital improvements and transitions of care. Most of the improvements were considered feasible and important with several serving as particularly viable strategies. These have the potential for implementation to improve the care of this vulnerable population and inform local and national quality improvement efforts.

Planning and Reporting Effective Web-Based RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method Panels: Literature Review and Preliminary Recommendations

BackgroundThe RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM), a variant of the Delphi Method, was developed to synthesize existing evidence and elicit the clinical judgement of medical experts on the appropriate treatment of specific clinical presentations. Technological advances now allow researchers to conduct expert panels on the internet, offering a cost-effective and convenient alternative to the traditional RAM. For example, the Department of Veterans Affairs recently used a web-based RAM to validate clinical recommendations for de-intensifying routine primary care services. A substantial literature describes and tests various aspects of the traditional RAM in health research; yet we know comparatively less about how researchers implement web-based expert panels.ObjectiveThe objectives of this study are twofold: (1) to understand how the web-based RAM process is currently used and reported in health research and (2) to provide preliminary reporting guidance for researchers to improve the transparency and reproducibility of reporting practices.MethodsThe PubMed database was searched to identify studies published between 2009 and 2019 that used a web-based RAM to measure the appropriateness of medical care. Methodological data from each article were abstracted. The following categories were assessed: composition and characteristics of the web-based expert panels, characteristics of panel procedures, results, and panel satisfaction and engagement.ResultsOf the 12 studies meeting the eligibility criteria and reviewed, only 42% (5/12) implemented the full RAM process with the remaining studies opting for a partial approach. Among those studies reporting, the median number of participants at first rating was 42. While 92% (11/12) of studies involved clinicians, 50% (6/12) involved multiple stakeholder types. Our review revealed that the studies failed to report on critical aspects of the RAM process. For example, no studies reported response rates with the denominator of previous rounds, 42% (5/12) did not provide panelists with feedback between rating periods, 50% (6/12) either did not have or did not report on the panel discussion period, and 25% (3/12) did not report on quality measures to assess aspects of the panel process (eg, satisfaction with the process).ConclusionsConducting web-based RAM panels will continue to be an appealing option for researchers seeking a safe, efficient, and democratic process of expert agreement. Our literature review uncovered inconsistent reporting frameworks and insufficient detail to evaluate study outcomes. We provide preliminary recommendations for reporting that are both timely and important for producing replicable, high-quality findings. The need for reporting standards is especially critical given that more people may prefer to participate in web-based rather than in-person panels due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Update to the structured MRI report for primary staging of rectal cancer : Perspective from the SAR Disease Focused Panel on Rectal and Anal Cancer.

To review existing structured MRI reports for primary staging of rectal cancer and create a new, freely available structured report based on multidisciplinary expert opinion and literature review. Twenty abdominal imaging experts from the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR)'s Disease Focused Panel (DFP) on Rectal and Anal Cancer completed a questionnaire and participated in a subsequent consensus meeting based on the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. Twenty-two items were classified via a group survey as "appropriate" or "inappropriate" (defined by ≥ 70% consensus), or "needs group discussion" (defined by < 70% consensus). Certain items were also discussed with multidisciplinary team members from colorectal surgery, oncology and pathology. After completion of the questionnaire, 16 (72%) items required further discussion (< 70% consensus). Following group discussion, consensus was achieved for 21 (95%) of the items. Based on the consensus meeting, a revised structured report was developed. The most significant modifications included (1) Exclusion of the T2/early T3 category; (2) Replacement of the term "circumferential resection margin (CRM)" with "mesorectal fascia (MRF)"; (3) A revised definition of "mucinous content"; (4) Creation of two distinct categories for suspicious lymph nodes (LNs) and tumor deposits; and (5) Classification of suspicious extra-mesorectal LNs by anatomic location. The SAR DFP on Rectal and Anal Cancer recommends using this newly updated reporting template for primary MRI staging of rectal cancer.

Michigan Plan for Appropriate Tailored Healthcare in Pregnancy Prenatal Care Recommendations: A Practical Guide for Maternity Care Clinicians.

Prenatal care is an important preventive service designed to improve the health of pregnant patients and their infants. Prenatal care delivery recommendations have remained unchanged since 1930, when the 12-14 in-person visit schedule was first established to detect preeclampsia. In 2020, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, in collaboration with the University of Michigan, convened a panel of maternity care experts to determine new prenatal care delivery recommendations. The panel recognized the need to include emerging evidence and experience, including significant changes in prenatal care delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic, pre-existing knowledge of the importance of individualized care plans, the promise of telemedicine, and the significant influence of social and structural determinants of health (SSDoH) on pregnancy outcomes. Recommendations were derived using the RAND-UCLA appropriateness method, a rigorous e-Delphi method, and are designed to extend beyond the acute public health crisis. The resulting Michigan Plan for Appropriate Tailored Healthcare in pregnancy (MiPATH) includes recommendations for key aspects of prenatal care delivery: (1) the recommended number of prenatal visits, (2) the frequency of prenatal visits, (3) the role of monitoring routine pregnancy parameters (blood pressure, fetal heart tones, weight, and fundal height), (4) integration of telemedicine into routine care, and (5) inclusion of (SSDoH). Resulting recommendations demonstrate a new approach to prenatal care delivery that incorporates medical, SSDoH, and patient preferences, to develop individualized prenatal care delivery plans. The purpose of this document is to outline the new MiPATH recommendations and to provide practical guidance on implementing them in routine practice.

Staging, recurrence and follow-up of uterine cervical cancer using MRI: Updated Guidelines of the European Society of Urogenital Radiology after revised FIGO staging 2018.

The recommendations cover indications for MRI examination including acquisition planes, patient preparation, imaging protocol including multi-parametric approaches such as diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI-MR),dynamic contrast-enhanced imaging (DCE-MR) and standardised reporting. The document also underscores the value of whole-body 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and highlights potential futuremethods. In 2019, the ESUR female pelvic imaging working group reviewed the revised 2018 FIGO staging system, the up-to-date clinical management guidelines, and the recent imaging literature. The RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) was followed to develop the current ESUR consensus guidelines following methodological steps: literature research, questionnaire developments, panel selection, survey, data extraction and analysis. The updated ESUR guidelinesarerecommendations based on ≥ 80% consensus among experts. If ≥ 80% agreement was not reached, the action was indicated as optional. The present ESUR guidelinesfocuson the main role of MRIinthe initial staging, response monitoring and evaluation of disease recurrence. Whole-body FDG-PET plays an important role in the detection of lymph nodes(LNs) and distant metastases. • T2WI and DWI-MR are now recommended for initial staging, monitoring of response and evaluation of recurrence. • DCE-MR is optional; its primary role remains in the research setting. • T2WI, DWI-MRI and whole-body FDG-PET/CT enable comprehensive assessment of treatment response and recurrence.

Measuring the Appropriateness of Spinal Manipulation for Chronic Low Back and Chronic Neck Pain in Chiropractic Patients.

RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RUAM) applied to chiropractic manipulation for patients with chronic low-back pain (CLBP) and chronic neck pain (CNP). Determine the rate of appropriate care provided by US chiropractors. Spinal manipulation has been shown effective for CLBP and CNP but may not be appropriate for all patients with these conditions. Ratings of the appropriateness of spinal and cervical manipulation previously developed by two RUAM expert panels were applied to data abstracted from random samples of patient charts from chiropractors in six US regions to determine the appropriateness of manipulation for each patient. Of 125 chiropractors sampled, 89 provided charts that could be abstracted. Of the 2128 charts received, 1054 were abstracted. Charts received but not abstracted included 460 that were unusable (e.g., illegible), and 555 did not have CLBP or CNP. Across the abstracted charts 72% had CLBP, 57% had CNP, and 29% had both; 84% of patients with CLBP and 86% with CNP received manipulation. Patients with CLBP who had minor neurologic findings, sciatic nerve irritation, or no joint dysfunction were significantly less likely to receive manipulation. Patients with CNP who had substantial trauma etiology, no joint dysfunction, or no radiographs were significantly less likely to receive manipulation. Most manipulation for CLBP (64%) was appropriate and most manipulation for CNP (93%) was for patients where appropriateness was uncertain or equivocal. The proportions of patients receiving inappropriate manipulation for either condition were low (1%-3%) as were the numbers of patients presenting to these chiropractors for which manipulation was inappropriate. Chiropractors in this US sample tend to provide manipulation to very few patients with CLBP or CNP for which it is inappropriate. However, more research is needed to determine which patients with CNP benefit from manipulation.Level of Evidence: 4.

Smartphone-based dispatch of community first responders to out-of-hospital cardiac arrest - statements from an international consensus conference

BackgroundOver the past decade Smartphone-based activation (SBA) of Community First Responders (CFR) to out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) has gained much attention and popularity throughout Europe. Various programmes have been established, and interestingly there are considerable differences in technology, responder spectrum and the degree of integration into the prehospital emergency services. It is unclear whether these dissimilarities affect outcome. This paper reviews the current state in five European countries, reveals similarities and controversies, and presents consensus statements generated in an international conference with the intention to support public decision making on future strategies for SBA of CFR.MethodsIn a consensus conference a three-step approach was used: (i) presentation of current research from five European countries; (ii) workshops discussing evidence amongst the audience to generate consensus statements; (iii) anonymous real-time voting applying the modified RAND-UCLA Appropriateness method to adopt or reject the statements. The consensus panel aimed to represent all stakeholders involved in this topic.ResultsWhile 21 of 25 generated statements gained approval, consensus was only found for 5 of them. One statement was rejected but without consensus. Members of the consensus conference confirmed that CFR save lives. They further acknowledged the crucial role of emergency medical control centres and called for nationwide strategies.ConclusionsMembers of the consensus conference acknowledged that smartphone-based activation of CFR to OHCA saves lives. The statements generated by the consensus conference may assist the public, healthcare services and governments to utilise these systems to their full potential, and direct the research community towards fields that still need to be addressed.

Development of a Set of Lupus-Specific, Ambulatory Care-Sensitive, Potentially Preventable Adverse Conditions: A Delphi Consensus Study.

Individuals with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are at high risk for infections and SLE- and medication-related complications. The present study was undertaken to define a set of SLE-specific adverse outcomes that could be prevented, or their complications minimized, if timely, effective ambulatory care had been received. We used a modified Delphi process beginning with a literature review and key informant interviews to select initial SLE-specific potentially preventable conditions. We assembled a panel of 16 nationally recognized US-based experts from 8 subspecialties. Guided by the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method, we held 2 survey rounds with controlled feedback and an interactive webinar to reach consensus regarding preventability and importance on a population level for a set of SLE-specific adverse conditions. In a final round, the panelists endorsed the potentially preventable conditions. Thirty-five potential conditions were initially proposed; 62 conditions were ultimately considered during the Delphi process. The response rate was 100% for both survey rounds, 88% for the webinar, and 94% for final approval. The 25 SLE-specific conditions meeting consensus as potentially preventable and important on a population level fell into 4 categories: vaccine-preventable illnesses (6 conditions), medication-related complications (8 conditions), reproductive health-related complications (6 conditions), and SLE-related complications (5 conditions). We reached consensus on a diverse set of adverse outcomes relevant to SLE patients that may be preventable if patients receive high-quality ambulatory care. This set of outcomes may be studied at the health system level to determine how to best allocate resources and improve quality to reduce avoidable outcomes and disparities among those at highest risk.