scholarly journals Pedi-R-MAPP: The development of a nutritional awareness tool for use in remote paediatric consultations using a modified Delphi consensus

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.J. Ashton ◽  
R.M. Beattie ◽  
S. Cader ◽  
L.H. Cooke ◽  
M.L. Cooke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Awareness Tool

scholarly journals Aromatic L-amino Acid Decarboxylase (AADC) deficiency: results from an Italian modified Delphi consensus

2021 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Fusco ◽  
◽  
Vincenzo Leuzzi ◽  
Pasquale Striano ◽  
Roberta Battini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Diagnostic Delay ◽  
Steering Committee ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Acid Decarboxylase ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Amino Acid Decarboxylase ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Number Of Patients

Abstract Background Aromatic L-amino acid decarboxylase (AADC) deficiency is a rare and underdiagnosed neurometabolic disorder resulting in a complex neurological and non-neurological phenotype, posing diagnostic challenges resulting in diagnostic delay. Due to the low number of patients, gathering high-quality scientific evidence on diagnosis and treatment is difficult. Additionally, based on the estimated prevalence, the number of undiagnosed patients is likely to be high. Methods Italian experts in AADC deficiency formed a steering committee to engage clinicians in a modified Delphi consensus to promote discussion, and support research, dissemination and awareness on this disorder. Five experts in the field elaborated six main topics, each subdivided into 4 statements and invited 13 clinicians to give their anonymous feedback. Results 100% of the statements were answered and a consensus was reached at the first round. This enabled the steering committee to acknowledge high rates of agreement between experts on clinical presentation, phenotypes, diagnostic work-up and treatment strategies. A research gap was identified in the lack of standardized cognitive and motor outcome data. The need for setting up an Italian working group and a patients’ association, together with the dissemination of knowledge inside and outside scientific societies in multiple medical disciplines were recognized as critical lines of intervention. Conclusions The panel expressed consensus with high rates of agreement on a series of statements paving the way to disseminate clear messages concerning disease presentation, diagnosis and treatment and strategic interventions to disseminate knowledge at different levels. Future lines of research were also identified.

Vaccinations in patients with multiple sclerosis: A Delphi consensus statement

2020 ◽  
pp. 135245852095231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agostino Riva ◽  
Valeria Barcella ◽  
Simone V Benatti ◽  
Marco Capobianco ◽  
Ruggero Capra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Seasonal Influenza ◽  
Careful Consideration ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Consensus Process ◽  
Disease Modifying Drugs ◽  
Risks And Benefits ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

Background: Patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) are at increased risk of infection. Vaccination can mitigate these risks but only if safe and effective in MS patients, including those taking disease-modifying drugs. Methods: A modified Delphi consensus process (October 2017–June 2018) was used to develop clinically relevant recommendations for making decisions about vaccinations in patients with MS. A series of statements and recommendations regarding the efficacy, safety and timing of vaccine administration in patients with MS were generated in April 2018 by a panel of experts based on a review of the published literature performed in October 2017. Results: Recommendations include the need for an ‘infectious diseases card’ of each patient’s infectious and immunisation history at diagnosis in order to exclude and eventually treat latent infections. We suggest the implementation of the locally recommended vaccinations, if possible at MS diagnosis, otherwise with vaccination timing tailored to the planned/current MS treatment, and yearly administration of the seasonal influenza vaccine regardless of the treatment received. Conclusion: Patients with MS should be vaccinated with careful consideration of risks and benefits. However, there is an urgent need for more research into vaccinations in patients with MS to guide evidence-based decision making.

ID: 3519259 BEYOND THE RECENT MODIFIED DELPHI CONSENSUS STATEMENTS ON WATER EXCHANGE (WE) - MORE NOVEL BENEFITS OF WE.

2021 ◽  
Vol 93 (6) ◽  
pp. AB35-AB36
Author(s):  
Yu-Hsi Hsieh ◽  
Chih Wei Tseng ◽  
Malcolm Koo ◽  
Felix W. Leung
Keyword(s):  
Water Exchange ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Consensus Statements

scholarly journals Distal rectus femoris surgery in children with cerebral palsy: results of a Delphi consensus project

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Robert M. Kay ◽  
Kristan Pierz ◽  
James McCarthy ◽  
H. Kerr Graham ◽  
Henry Chambers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cerebral Palsy ◽  
Rectus Femoris ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
International Panel ◽  
Children With Cerebral Palsy ◽  
Stiff Knee ◽  
Paediatric Orthopaedic ◽  
Gmfcs Level

Purpose The purpose of this study was for an international panel of experts to establish consensus indications for distal rectus femoris surgery in children with cerebral palsy (CP) using a modified Delphi method. Methods The panel used a five-level Likert scale to record agreement or disagreement with 33 statements regarding distal rectus femoris surgery. The panel responded to statements regarding general characteristics, clinical indications, computerized gait data, intraoperative techniques and outcome measures. Consensus was defined as at least 80% of responses being in the highest or lowest two of the five Likert ratings, and general agreement as 60% to 79% falling into the highest or lowest two ratings. There was no agreement if neither threshold was reached. Results Consensus or general agreement was reached for 17 of 33 statements (52%). There was general consensus that distal rectus femoris surgery is better for stiff knee gait than is proximal rectus femoris release. There was no consensus about whether the results of distal rectus femoris release were comparable to those following distal rectus femoris transfer. Gross Motor Function Classification System (GMFCS) level was an important factor for the panel, with the best outcomes expected in children functioning at GMFCS levels I and II. The panel also reached consensus that they do distal rectus femoris surgery less frequently than earlier in their careers, in large part reflecting the narrowing of indications for this surgery over the last decade. Conclusion This study can help paediatric orthopaedic surgeons optimize decision-making for, and outcomes of, distal rectus femoris surgery in children with CP. Level of evidence V

scholarly journals Management of repository corticotrophin injection therapy for pulmonary sarcoidosis: a Delphi study

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (155) ◽  
pp. 190147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franck F. Rahaghi ◽  
Nadera J. Sweiss ◽  
Lesley Ann Saketkoo ◽  
Mary Beth Scholand ◽  
Joseph B. Barney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Pulmonary Sarcoidosis ◽  
Event Management ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Consensus Recommendations ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Immunosuppressive Medications ◽  
Starting Dose

In patients treated with repository corticotrophin injection (RCI) for pulmonary sarcoidosis, effective management of adverse events may improve adherence. However, management of adverse events may be challenging due to limitations in real-world clinical experience with RCI and available published guidelines.We surveyed 12 physicians with a modified Delphi process using three questionnaires. Questionnaire 1 consisted of open-ended questions. Panellists' answers were developed into a series of statements for Questionnaires 2 and 3. In these, physicians rated their agreement with the statements using a Likert scale.Key consensus recommendations included a starting dose of 40 units twice a week for patients with less severe disease, continued at a maintenance dose for patients who responded, particularly those with chronic refractory sarcoidosis. Panellists reached consensus that concomitant steroids should be quickly tapered in patients receiving RCI, but that concomitant use of immunosuppressive medications should be continued. Panellists developed consensus recommendations for adverse event management, and reached consensus that RCI should be down-titrated or discontinued if other interventions for the adverse effects fail or if the adverse effect is severe.In the absence of clinical evidence, our Delphi consensus opinions may provide practical guidance to physicians on the management of RCI to treat pulmonary sarcoidosis.

Developing a Fracture Risk Clinical Assessment Protocol for Long-Term Care: A Modified Delphi Consensus Process

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin McArthur ◽  
Loretta Hillier ◽  
George Ioannidis ◽  
Jonathan D. Adachi ◽  
Lora Giangregorio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fracture Risk ◽  
Clinical Assessment ◽  
Long Term Care ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Consensus Process ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Modified Delphi

scholarly journals Areas of agreement in the management of childhood non-infectious chronic anterior uveitis in the UK

2019 ◽  
Vol 104 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ameenat Lola Solebo ◽  
Jugnoo S Rahi ◽  
Andrew D Dick ◽  
Athimalaipet V Ramanan ◽  
Jane Ashworth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Anterior Uveitis ◽  
Severe Disease ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Multiple Sources ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
The Uk ◽  
High Level

Background/aimsThere is a paucity of high-level evidence to support the management of childhood uveitis, particularly for those children without juvenile idiopathic arthritis uveitis (JIA). We undertook a modified Delphi consensus exercise to identify agreement in the management of chronic anterior uveitis (CAU), the most common manifestation of childhood disease.MethodsA four-round, two-panel process was undertaken between June and December 2017. Paediatric uveitis specialists identified through multiple sources, including a multicentre network (the Paediatric Ocular Inflammation Group), were invited to participate. They were asked whether they agreed with items derived from existing guidelines on the management of JIA-U when extrapolated to the population of all children with CAU. Consensus was defined as agreement greater than or equal to 75% of respondents.Results26 of the 38 (68%) invited specialists participated with the exercise, and response rates were 100% for rounds one to three, and 92% for round four. Consensus was reached on 23 of the 44 items. Items for which consensus was not reached included management at presentation, use of systemic and periocular steroids for children with severe disease and the role of conventional steroid sparing immunosuppressants beyond methotrexate.ConclusionThe areas of management uncertainty at the level of the group, as indicated by absence of consensus, reflect the areas where the evidence base is particularly poor. Our findings identify the key areas for the future research needed to ensure better outcomes for this blinding childhood ocular inflammatory disorders.

scholarly journals Defining colchicine resistance/intolerance in patients with familial Mediterranean fever: a modified-Delphi consensus approach

Rheumatology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seza Özen ◽  
Erdal Sag ◽  
Eldad Ben-Chetrit ◽  
Marco Gattorno ◽  
Ahmet Gül ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Familial Mediterranean Fever ◽  
Nominal Group ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Health Authorities ◽  
Colchicine Resistance ◽  
Mediterranean Fever ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Objectives Colchicine is the main treatment for familial Mediterranean fever (FMF). Although a number of individuals with FMF are intolerant/resistant to colchicine, there is no standard definition of colchicine resistance/intolerance. We developed a set of evidence-based core statements defining colchicine resistance/intolerance in patients with FMF that may serve as a guide for clinicians and health authorities. Methods A set of statements was identified using a modified-Delphi consensus-based approach. The process involved development of an initial colchicine resistance/intolerance-related questionnaire derived from a systematic literature review. The questionnaire, which was completed by an international panel of 11 adult and pediatric rheumatologists with expertise in FMF, was analysed anonymously. The results informed draft consensus statements that were discussed by a round-table expert panel, using a nominal group technique to agree on the selection and wording of the final statements. Results Consensus among the panel was achieved on 8 core statements defining colchicine resistance/intolerance in patients with FMF. A definition of resistance was agreed upon that included recurrent clinical attacks (average one or more attacks per month over a 3-month period), or persistent laboratory inflammation in between attacks. Other core statements recognize the importance of assessing treatment adherence, and the impact of active disease and intolerance to colchicine on quality of life. Conclusion Based on expert opinion, a set of evidence-based core statements defining colchicine resistance/intolerance in patients with FMF were identified to help guide clinicians and health authorities in the management of patients with FMF.

scholarly journals Home therapy for inherited bleeding disorders in South Africa: Results of a modified Delphi consensus process

2019 ◽  
Vol 109 (9) ◽  
pp. 639
Author(s):  
J N Mahlangu ◽  
Y Naidoo ◽  
Y Goga ◽  
M Vaithlingum ◽  
J Joubert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Bleeding Disorders ◽  
Home Therapy ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Consensus Process ◽  
Modified Delphi

scholarly journals A balanced approach to identifying, prioritising and evaluating all potential consequences of quality improvement: modified Delphi study

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. e023890 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madalina Toma ◽  
Tobias Dreischulte ◽  
Nicola M Gray ◽  
Bruce Guthrie
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Delphi Study ◽  
Qualitative Evaluation ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Consensus Methods ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Modified Delphi ◽  
Balanced Approach ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Qualitative Work

ObjectivesHealthcare is a complex system, so quality improvement will commonly lead to unintended consequences which are rarely evaluated. In previous qualitative work, we proposed a framework for considering the range of these potential consequences, in terms of their desirability and the extent to which they were predictable or expected during planning. This paper elaborates on the previous findings, using consensus methods to examine what consequences should be identified, why and how to prioritise, evaluate and interpret all identified consequences, and what stakeholders should be involved throughout this process.DesignTwo-round modified Delphi consensus study.Setting and participantsBoth rounds were completed by 60 panellists from an academic, clinical or management background and experience in designing, implementing or evaluating quality improvement programmes.ResultsPanellists agreed that trade-offs (expected undesirable consequences) and unpleasant surprises (unexpected undesirable consequences) should be actively considered. Measurement of harmful consequences for patients, and those with high workload or financial impact was prioritised, and their evaluation could also involve the use of qualitative methods. Clinical teams were agreed as important to involve at all stages, from identifying potential consequences, prioritising which of those to systematically evaluate, undertaking appropriate evaluation and interpreting the findings. Patients were necessary in identifying consequences, managers in identifying and prioritising, and improvement advisors in interpreting the data.ConclusionThere was consensus that a balanced approach to considering all the consequences of improvement can be achieved by carefully considering predictable trade-offs from the outset and deliberately pausing after implementation to identify any unexpected surprises and make an informed decision as to whether quantitative or qualitative evaluation is needed and feasible. Stakeholders’ roles in in the process of identifying, prioritising, evaluating and interpreting potential consequences should be explicitly addressed within planning and revisited during and after implementation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document