Use of a modified Delphi approach to develop research priorities in HPB surgery across the United Kingdom

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

BACKGROUND

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.

METHOD

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.

RESULTS

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.

DISCUSSION

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.

International Expert Consensus on Defining Textbook Oncologic Outcomes in Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Colorectal Peritoneal Metastasis

BACKGROUND

Textbook oncologic outcome (TOO) is a composite metric shown to correlate with improved survival after curative intent oncologic procedures. Despite increasing use among disciplines in surgical oncology, no consensus exists for its definition in cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

STUDY DESIGN

An international consensus-based study employed a Delphi methodology to achieve agreement. Fifty-four senior surgeons from the peritoneal surface malignancies field received a questionnaire comprising TOO parameters divided into 3 surgical domains: operative, short-term, and long-term postoperative outcomes. Two online meetings with participants defined the new criteria. Consensus was achieved when 75% of agreement rate was reached. Clinical data of patients who underwent CRS and HIPEC for colorectal peritoneal metastasis between 2010 and 2022 from 1 designated center (Sheba Medical Center) were collected, the consensus definition applied and outcomes analyzed.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight surgeons (70%) participated. Expert consensus TOO parameters for colorectal peritoneal metastasis CRS and HIPEC included the absence of unplanned reoperations during 30 days postoperation, absence of severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥III), absence of unplanned readmissions during 30 days postoperation, 90-day postoperative mortality, and absence of contraindications for chemotherapy within 12 weeks from operation, and included the achievement of complete cytoreduction (CC0). The study cohort consisted of 251 patients, and 151 (60%) met TOO criteria. Patients who achieved TOO had significantly better overall survival (median 67.5 months, 95% CI) vs patients who did not achieve TOO (median 44.6 months, 95% CI, p < 0.001) and significantly improved disease-free survival (median, 12 months, 95% CI, vs 9 months, 95% CI, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Achievement of TOO as defined by consensus statement is associated with improved survival.

Evaluating Functional Performance Tests in those with Non-arthritic Intra-articular Hip Pain: An International Consensus Statement

Background

Non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain, caused by various pathologies, leads to impairments in range of motion, strength, balance, and neuromuscular control. Although functional performance tests offer valuable insights in evaluating these patients, no clear consensus exists regarding the optimal tests for this patient population.

Purpose

This study aimed to establish expert consensus on the application and selection of functional performance tests in individuals presenting with non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain.

Study Design

A modified Delphi technique was used with fourteen physical therapy experts, all members of the International Society for Hip Arthroscopy (ISHA). The panelists participated in three rounds of questions and related discussions to reach full consensus on the application and selection of functional performance tests.

Results

The panel agreed that functional performance tests should be utilized at initial evaluation, re-evaluations, and discharge, as well as criterion for assessing readiness for returning to sports. Tests should be as part of a multimodal assessment of neuromuscular control, strength, range of motion, and balance, applied in a graded fashion depending on the patient's characteristics. Clinicians should select functional performance tests with objective scoring criteria and prioritize the use of tests with supporting psychometric evidence. A list of recommended functional performance tests with varying intensity levels is provided. Low-intensity functional performance tests encompass controlled speed in a single plane with no impact. Medium-intensity functional performance tests involve controlled speed in multiple planes with low impact. High-intensity functional performance tests include higher speeds in multiple planes with higher impact and agility requirements. Sport-specific movement tests should mimic the patient's particular activity or sport.

Conclusion

This international consensus statement provides recommendations for clinicians regarding selection and utilization of functional performance tests for those with non-arthritic intra-articular hip pain. These recommendations will encourage greater consistency and standardization among clinicians during a physical therapy assessment.

The multi-societal European consensus on the terminology, diagnosis and management of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases: an E-AHPBA consensus in partnership with ESSO, ESCP, ESGAR, and CIRSE

BACKGROUND

Contemporary management of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases is complex. The aim of this project was to provide a practical framework for care of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases with a focus on terminology, diagnosis and management.

METHODS

This project was a multi-organisational, multidisciplinary consensus. The consensus group produced statements which focused on terminology, diagnosis and management. Statements were refined during an online Delphi process and those with 70% agreement or above were reviewed at a final meeting. Iterations of the report were shared by electronic mail to arrive at a final agreed document comprising twelve key statements.

RESULTS

Synchronous liver metastases are those detected at the time of presentation of the primary tumour. The term "early metachronous metastases" applies to those absent at presentation but detected within 12 months of diagnosis of the primary tumour with "late metachronous metastases" applied to those detected after 12 months. Disappearing metastases applies to lesions which are no longer detectable on MR scan after systemic chemotherapy. Guidance was provided on the recommended composition of tumour boards and clinical assessment in emergency and elective settings. The consensus focused on treatment pathways including systemic chemotherapy, synchronous surgery and the staged approach with either colorectal or liver-directed surgery as first step. Management of pulmonary metastases and the role of minimally invasive surgery was discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

The recommendations of this contemporary consensus provide information of practical value to clinicians managing patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases.

An International Expert Delphi Consensus on Defining Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery (TOLS)

OBJECTIVE

To reach global expert consensus on the definition of TOLS in minimally invasive and open liver resection among renowned international expert liver surgeons using a modified Delphi method.

BACKGROUND

Textbook outcome is a novel composite measure combining the most desirable postoperative outcomes into one single measure and representing the ideal postoperative course. Despite a recently developed international definition of Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery (TOLS), a standardized and expert consensus-based definition is lacking.

METHODS

This international, consensus-based, qualitative study used a Delphi process to achieve consensus on the definition of TOLS. The survey comprised 6 surgical domains with a total of 26 questions on individual surgical outcome variables. The process included 4 rounds of online questionnaires. Consensus was achieved when a threshold of at least 80% agreement was reached. The results from the Delphi rounds were used to establish an international definition of TOLS.

RESULTS

In total, 44 expert liver surgeons from 22 countries and all 3 major international hepato-pancreato-biliary associations completed round 1. Forty-two (96%), 41 (98%), and 41 (98%) of the experts participated in round 2, 3, and 4, respectively. The TOLS definition derived from the consensus process included the absence of intraoperative grade ≥2 incidents, postoperative bile leakage grade B/C, postoperative liver failure grade B/C, 90-day major postoperative complications, 90-day readmission due to surgery-related major complications, 90-day/in-hospital mortality, and the presence of R0 resection margin.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study providing an international expert consensus-based definition of TOLS for minimally invasive and open liver resections by the use of a formal Delphi consensus approach. TOLS may be useful in assessing patient-level hospital performance and carrying out international comparisons between centers with different clinical practices to further improve patient outcomes.

Ilizaliturri Jr. V, Kohlrieser D, Laskovski J, Lifshitz L, P. McGovern R, Monnington K, O’Donnell J, Takla A, Tyler T, Voight M, Wuerz T, Martin RL. The 2022 International Society for Hip Preservation (ISHA) physiotherapy agreement on assessment and treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS): an international consensus statement

The 2022 International Society of Hip Preservation (ISHA) physiotherapy agreement on assessment and treatment of greater trochanteric pain syndrome (GTPS) was intended to present a physiotherapy consensus on the assessment and surgical and non-surgical physiotherapy management of patients with GTPS. The panel consisted of 15 physiotherapists and eight orthopaedic surgeons. Currently, there is a lack of high-quality literature supporting non-operative and operative physiotherapy management. Therefore, a group of physiotherapists who specialize in the treatment of non-arthritic hip pathology created this consensus statement regarding physiotherapy management of GTPS. The consensus was conducted using a modified Delphi technique to guide physiotherapy-related decisions according to the current knowledge and expertise regarding the following: (i) evaluation of GTPS, (ii) non-surgical physiotherapy management, (iii) use of corticosteroids and orthobiologics and (iv) surgical indications and post-operative physiotherapy management.

A modified Delphi process to establish research priorities in hernia surgery

BACKGROUND

Abdominal wall hernia repair is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures worldwide, yet despite this, there remains a lack of high-quality evidence to support best management. The aim of the study was to use a modified Delphi process to determine future research priorities in this field.

METHODS

Stakeholders were invited by email, using British Hernia Society membership details or Twitter, to submit individual research questions via an online survey. In addition, questions obtained from a patient focus group (PFG) were collated to form Phase I. Two rounds of prioritization by stakeholders (phases II and III) were then completed to determine a final list of research questions. All questions were analyzed on an anonymized basis.

RESULTS

A total of 266 questions, 19 from the PFG, were submitted by 113 stakeholders in Phase I. Of these, 64 questions were taken forward for prioritization in Phase II, which was completed by 107 stakeholders. Following Phase II analysis, 97 stakeholders prioritized 36 questions in Phase III. This resulted in a final list of 14 research questions, 3 of which were from the PFG. Stakeholders included patients and healthcare professionals (consultant surgeons, trainee surgeons and other multidisciplinary members) from over 27 countries during the 3 phases.

CONCLUSION

The study has identified 14 key research priorities pertaining to abdominal wall hernia surgery. Uniquely, these priorities have been determined from participation by both healthcare professionals and patients. These priorities should now be addressed by well-designed, high-quality international collaborative research.

Use of a modified Delphi process to develop research priorities in major trauma

Purpose

The burden of major trauma within the UK is ever increasing. There is a need to establish research priorities within the field. Delphi methodology can be used to develop consensus opinion amongst a group of stakeholders. This can be used to prioritise clinically relevant, patient-centred research questions to guide future funding allocations. The aim of our study was to identify key future research priorities pertaining to the management of major trauma in the UK.

Methods

A three-phased modified Delphi process was undertaken. Phase 1 involved the submission of research questions by members of the trauma community using an online survey (Phase 1). Phases 2 and 3 involved two consecutive rounds of prioritisation after questions were subdivided into 6 subcategories: Brain Injury, Rehabilitation, Trauma in Older People, Pre-hospital, Interventional, and Miscellaneous (Phases 2 and 3). Cut-off points were agreed by consensus amongst the steering subcommittees. This established a final prioritised list of research questions.

Results

In phase 1, 201 questions were submitted by 65 stakeholders. After analysis and with consensus achieved, 186 questions were taken forward for prioritisation in phase 2 with 114 included in phase 3. 56 prioritised major trauma research questions across the 6 categories were identified with a clear focus on long-term patient outcomes. Research priorities across the patient pathway from roadside to rehabilitation were deemed of importance.

Conclusions

Consensus within the major trauma community has identified 56 key research questions across 6 categories. Dissemination of these questions to funding bodies to allow for the development of high-quality research is now required. There is a clear indication for targeted multi-centre multi-disciplinary research in major trauma.

A Modified AUGIS Delphi Process to Establish Future Research Priorities in Benign Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study was to use a modified Delphi process to determine the research priorities amongst benign upper gastrointestinal (UGI) surgeons in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

Delphi methodology may be utilised to develop consensus opinion amongst a group of experts. Members of the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland were invited to submit individual research questions via an online survey (phase I). Two rounds of prioritisation by multidisciplinary expert healthcare professionals (phase II and III) were completed to determine a final list of high-priority research questions.

RESULTS

Four hundred and twenty-seven questions were submitted in phase I, and 51 with a benign UGI focus were taken forward for prioritisation in phase II. Twenty-eight questions were ranked in phase III. A final list of 11 high-priority questions had an emphasis on acute pancreatitis, Barrett's oesophagus and benign biliary disease.

CONCLUSION

A modified Delphi process has produced a list of 11 high-priority research questions in benign UGI surgery. Future studies and awards from funding bodies should reflect this consensus list of prioritised questions in the interest of improving patient care and encouraging collaborative research.

Research priorities in cardiovascular imaging

Aim

A modified Delphi approach was used to develop consensus opinion among British Society for Cardiac Imaging/British Society of Cardiac CT (BSCI/BSCCT) members in order to prioritise research questions in cardiovascular imaging.

Methods

All members of the BSCI/BSCCT were invited to submit research questions that they considered to be of the highest clinical and/or academic priority in the field of cardiovascular imaging (phase 1). Subsequently a steering committee removed duplicate questions and combined questions of a similar theme by consensus agreement where appropriate. BSCI/BSCCT members were invited to rank the resulting research questions in two further iterative rounds (phases 2 and 3) to determine a final list of high-priority research questions.

Results

A total of 111 research questions were submitted in phase 1 by 30 BSCI/BSCCT members. While there was a broad range of topics, from determining the optimal features/markers of the vulnerable plaque to investigating how cardiac imaging can best be used to maximise clinical outcomes and economic costs, multimodality imaging-related (n=44, 40%) questions dominated the categories and coronary artery imaging (n=40, 36%) was the most common topic. Over two iterative rounds of prioritisation of these research questions, the original 111 were reduced to 75 questions in round 2, and 25 in round 3. From these 25 a final Top 10 list was distilled by consensus grouping.

Conclusion

This study has identified and ranked the top research priorities in cardiovascular imaging, as identified by the BSCI/BSCCT membership. This is a first step towards identifying the cardiovascular imaging research priorities within the UK and may assist researchers and funding bodies alike in setting priorities.

A modified AUGIS Delphi process to establish research priorities in bariatric and metabolic surgery

Delphi methodology may be utilized to develop consensus opinion among a group of experts. The aim of our study was to use a modified Delphi process to determine the future research priorities among bariatric and metabolic healthcare professionals in the United Kingdom. Members of the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons and the British Obesity and Metabolic Surgery Society were invited to submit individual research questions via an online survey (phase I). Two rounds of prioritization by multidisciplinary expert healthcare professionals (phase II and III) were completed to determine a final list of high-priority research questions. Fifty-one bariatric and metabolic surgery-focused questions were identified in phase I. Thirty-five questions were taken forward for prioritization in phase II. Eleven high-priority questions were identified in phase III. The final list of high-priority questions had an emphasis on the pathophysiology and long-term sequelae of bariatric and metabolic surgery. A modified Delphi process has produced a list of 11 high-priority research questions in bariatric and metabolic surgery. Future studies and awards from funding bodies should reflect this consensus list of prioritized questions in the interest of improving patient care and encouraging collaborative research across multiple centres.