Practice Standards for the Use of Multimodality Neuromonitoring: A Delphi Consensus Process

OBJECTIVES

To address areas in which there is no consensus for the technologies, effort, and training necessary to integrate and interpret information from multimodality neuromonitoring (MNM).

DESIGN

A three-round Delphi consensus process.

SETTING

Electronic surveys and virtual meeting.

SUBJECTS

Participants with broad MNM expertise from adult and pediatric intensive care backgrounds.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Two rounds of surveys were completed followed by a virtual meeting to resolve areas without consensus and a final survey to conclude the Delphi process. With 35 participants consensus was achieved on 49% statements concerning MNM. Neurologic impairment and the potential for MNM to guide management were important clinical considerations. Experts reached consensus for the use of MNM-both invasive and noninvasive-for patients in coma with traumatic brain injury, aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, and intracranial hemorrhage. There was consensus that effort to integrate and interpret MNM requires time independent of daily clinical duties, along with specific skills and expertise. Consensus was reached that training and educational platforms are necessary to develop this expertise and to provide clinical correlation.

CONCLUSIONS

We provide expert consensus in the clinical considerations, minimum necessary technologies, implementation, and training/education to provide practice standards for the use of MNM to individualize clinical care.

Delphi consensus on add-ons and social midia in Assisted Reproductive Technology

This article reports the annals of a national consensus meeting on add-ons and social networks in Assisted Reproduction Techniques (ART). The panel of experts has developed a set of consensus points and this document is intended to be referenced as a national consensus to allow social networks and add-ons to be used in ART, following the standards of the Code of Medical Ethics and the Federal Council of Medicine, in a safe ethical and responsible way.

Development of a Skin-Directed Scoring System for Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Epidermal Necrolysis: A Delphi Consensus Exercise

Importance

Scoring systems for Stevens-Johnson syndrome and epidermal necrolysis (EN) only estimate patient prognosis and are weighted toward comorbidities and systemic features; morphologic terminology for EN lesions is inconsistent.

Objectives

To establish consensus among expert dermatologists on EN terminology, morphologic progression, and most-affected sites, and to build a framework for developing a skin-directed scoring system for EN.

Evidence Review

A Delphi consensus using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness criteria was initiated with a core group from the Society of Dermatology Hospitalists to establish agreement on the optimal design for an EN cutaneous scoring instrument, terminology, morphologic traits, and sites of involvement.

Findings

In round 1, the 54 participating dermatology hospitalists reached consensus on all 49 statements (30 appropriate, 3 inappropriate, 16 uncertain). In round 2, they agreed on another 15 statements (8 appropriate, 7 uncertain). There was consistent agreement on the need for a skin-specific instrument; on the most-often affected skin sites (head and neck, chest, upper back, ocular mucosa, oral mucosa); and that blanching erythema, dusky erythema, targetoid erythema, vesicles/bullae, desquamation, and erosions comprise the morphologic traits of EN and can be consistently differentiated.

Conclusions and Relevance

This consensus exercise confirmed the need for an EN skin-directed scoring system, nomenclature, and differentiation of specific morphologic traits, and identified the sites most affected. It also established a baseline consensus for a standardized EN instrument with consistent terminology.

AFCOS: The Development of a Cryptoglandular Anal Fistula Core Outcome Set

OBJECTIVE

To develop a cryptoglandular Anal Fistula Core Outcome Set: a minimum set of outcomes that should be measured in all studies of cryptoglandular anal fistula treatment.

BACKGROUND

Variability in the outcomes that are reported in studies of cryptoglandular anal fistula treatment hampers systematic evidence synthesis to identify the best treatment.

METHODS

This study followed guidance from the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials initiative and consisted of three stages: (1) generation of candidate outcomes through systematic review of the literature and qualitative patient interviews; (2) prioritization of outcomes by key stakeholders, including patients, surgeons, gastroenterologists, and radiologists in an online Delphi consensus process; and (3) determination of the final Core Outcome Set (COS) in a consensus meeting attended by patients and clinicians.

RESULTS

Sixty-four outcomes were presented in the first Delphi survey round. A total of 191 participants from over 30 countries ranked these outcomes according to their importance in defining treatment success (57.6% surgeons and gastroenterologists, 8.9% radiologists, and 33.5% patients). After two rounds, 53 outcomes were identified as important and discussed in the consensus meeting attended by 10 patients and 12 clinicians. A final 10 outcomes were voted into the COS: clinical fistula healing, radiological healing, recurrence, development of additional fistulas, fistula symptoms, incontinence, psychological impact of treatment, complications and reinterventions, patient satisfaction, and quality of life.

CONCLUSION

The final COS represents an international, multidisciplinary, patient-centered attempt to establish consistency in fistula research, with a substantial focus on patient priorities for treatment.

Advanced bleeding control in combat casualty care: An international, expert-based Delphi consensus

BACKGROUND

Hemorrhage from truncal and junctional injuries is responsible for the vast majority of potentially survivable deaths in combat casualties, causing most of its fatalities in the prehospital arena. Optimizing the deployment of the advanced bleeding control modalities required for the management of these injuries is essential to improve the survival of severely injured casualties. This study aimed to establish consensus on the optimal use and implementation of advanced bleeding control modalities in combat casualty care.

METHODS

A Delphi method consisting of three rounds was used. An international expert panel of military physicians was selected by the researchers to complete the Delphi surveys. Consensus was reached if 70% or greater of respondents agreed and if 70% or greater responded.

RESULTS

Thirty-two experts from 10 different nations commenced the process and reached consensus on which bleeding control modalities should be part of the standard equipment, that these modalities should be available at all levels of care, that only trained physicians should be allowed to apply invasive bleeding control modalities, but all medical and nonmedical personnel should be allowed to apply noninvasive bleeding control modalities, and on the training requirements for providers. Consensus was also reached on the necessity of international registries and guidelines, and on certain indications and contraindications for resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) in military environments. No consensus was reached on the role of a wound clamp in military settings and the indications for REBOA in patients with chest trauma, penetrating axillary injury or penetrating neck injury in combination with thoracoabdominal injuries.

CONCLUSION

Consensus was reached on the contents of a standard bleeding control toolbox, where it should be available, providers and training requirements, international registries and guidelines, and potential indications for REBOA in military environments.

How should health policy and practice respond to the increased genetic risk associated with close relative marriage? results of a UK Delphi consensus building exercise

OBJECTIVES

(1) To explore professional and lay stakeholder views on the design and delivery of services in the area of consanguinity and genetic risk. (2) To identify principles on which there is sufficient consensus to warrant inclusion in a national guidance document. (3) To highlight differences of opinion that necessitate dialogue. (4) To identify areas where further research or development work is needed to inform practical service approaches.

DESIGN

Delphi exercise. Three rounds and one consensus conference.

SETTING

UK, national, web-based and face-to-face.

PARTICIPANTS

Recruitment via email distribution lists and professional networks. 42 participants with varied professional and demographic backgrounds contributed to at least one round of the exercise. 29 people participated in statement ranking across both rounds 2 and 3.

RESULTS

Over 700 individual statements were generated in round 1 and consolidated into 193 unique statements for ranking in round 2, with 60% achieving 80% or higher agreement. In round 3, 74% of statements achieved 80% or higher agreement. Consensus conference discussions resulted in a final set of 148 agreed statements, providing direction for both policy-makers and healthcare professionals. 13 general principles were agreed, with over 90% agreement on 12 of these. Remaining statements were organised into nine themes: national level leadership and coordination, local level leadership and coordination, training and competencies for healthcare and other professionals, genetic services, genetic literacy, primary care, referrals and coordination, monitoring and evaluation and research. Next steps and working groups were also identified.

CONCLUSIONS

There is high agreement among UK stakeholders on the general principles that should shape policy and practice responses in this area: equity of access, cultural competence, coordinated inter-agency working, co-design and empowerment and embedded evaluation. The need for strong national leadership to ensure more efficient sharing of knowledge and promotion of more equitable and consistent responses across the country is emphasised.

Curricular priorities for business ethics in medical practice and research: recommendations from Delphi consensus panels

BACKGROUND

No published curricula in the area of medical business ethics exist. This is surprising given that physicians wrestle daily with business decisions and that professional associations, the Institute of Medicine, Health and Human Services, Congress, and industry have issued related guidelines over the past 5 years. To fill this gap, the authors aimed (1) to identify the full range of medical business ethics topics that experts consider important to teach, and (2) to establish curricular priorities through expert consensus.

METHODS

In spring 2012, the authors conducted an online Delphi survey with two heterogeneous panels of experts recruited in the United States. One panel focused on business ethics in medical practice (n = 14), and 1 focused on business ethics in medical research (n = 12).

RESULTS

Panel 1 generated an initial list of 14 major topics related to business ethics in medical practice, and subsequently rated 6 topics as very important or essential to teach. Panel 2 generated an initial list of 10 major topics related to business ethics in medical research, and subsequently rated 5 as very important or essential. In both domains, the panel strongly recommended addressing problems that conflicts of interest can cause, legal guidelines, and the goals or ideals of the profession.

CONCLUSIONS

The Bander Center for Medical Business Ethics at Saint Louis University will use the results of the Delphi panel to develop online curricular resources for each of the highest rated topics.

How to evaluate the quality of fracture reduction and fixation of the wrist and ankle in clinical practice: a Delphi consensus

METHOD

A Delphi study was conducted to obtain consensus on the most important criteria for the radiological evaluation of the reduction and fixation of the wrist and ankle. The Delphi study consisted of a bipartite online questionnaire, focusing on the interpretation of radiographs and CT scans of the wrist and the ankle. Questions addressed imaging techniques, aspects of the anatomy and fracture reduction and fixation. Agreement was expressed as the percentage of respondents with similar answers. Consensus was defined as an agreement of at least 90%.

RESULTS

In three Delphi rounds, respectively, 64, 74 and 62 specialists, consisting of radiologists, trauma and orthopaedic surgeons from the Netherlands responded. After three Delphi rounds, consensus was reached for three out of 14 (21%) imaging techniques proposed, 11 out of the 13 (85%) anatomical aspects and 13 of the 22 (59%) items for the fracture reduction and fixation. This Delphi consensus differs from existing scoring protocols in terms of the greater number of anatomical aspects and aspects of fracture fixation requiring evaluation and is more suitable in clinical practice due to a lower emphasis on measurements.