Quality Indicator Selection for The Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (CPAC) Rectal Cancer Project: A Modified Delphi Study

IntroductionJunior doctors are responsible for a substantial number of prescribing errors, and final-year medical students lack sufficient prescribing knowledge and skills just before they graduate. Various national and international projects have been initiated to reform the teaching of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CP&T) during undergraduate medical training. However, there is as yet no list of commonly prescribed and available medicines that European doctors should be able to independently prescribe safely and effectively without direct supervision. Such a list could form the basis for a European Prescribing Exam and would harmonise European CP&T education. Therefore, the aim of this study is to reach consensus on a list of widely prescribed medicines, available in most European countries, that European junior doctors should be able to independently prescribe safely and effectively without direct supervision: the European List of Essential Medicines for Medical Education.Methods and analysisThis modified Delphi study will recruit European CP&T teachers (expert group). Two Delphi rounds will be carried out to enable a list to be drawn up of medicines that are available in ≥80% of European countries, which are considered standard prescribing practice, and which junior doctors should be able to prescribe safely and effectively without supervision.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by the Medical Ethics Review Committee of VU University Medical Center (no. 2020.335) and by the Ethical Review Board of the Netherlands Association for Medical Education (approved project no. NVMO‐ERB 2020.4.8). The European List of Essential Medicines for Medical Education will be presented at national and international conferences and will be submitted to international peer-reviewed journals. It will also be used to develop and implement the European Prescribing Exam.

Download Full-text

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of interventions for medically unexplained symptoms in primary care: A modified Delphi study

Journal of Psychosomatic Research ◽

10.1016/j.jpsychores.2021.110386 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 143 ◽

pp. 110386

Author(s):

Denise J.C. Hanssen ◽

Anika Ras ◽

Judith G.M. Rosmalen

Keyword(s):

Primary Care ◽

Delphi Study ◽

Medically Unexplained Symptoms ◽

Barriers And Facilitators ◽

Modified Delphi ◽

Medically Unexplained ◽

Unexplained Symptoms

Download Full-text

Expert Consensus on Clinical Application of Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Results From a Modified Delphi Study

Global Spine Journal ◽

10.1177/21925682211012688 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 219256822110126

Author(s):

Yong Hai ◽

Jingwei Liu ◽

Yuzeng Liu ◽

Tie Liu ◽

Xinuo Zhang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lumbar Spine ◽

Delphi Method ◽

Delphi Study ◽

Interbody Fusion ◽

Expert Consensus ◽

Lumbar Spine Surgery ◽

Study Group ◽

Lumbar Interbody Fusion ◽

Modified Delphi ◽

Chinese Study

Study Design: Modified Delphi study. Objective: The objective of this study was to establish expert consensus on the application of lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) by using the modified Delphi study. Methods: From June 2019 to March 2020, Members of the Chinese Study Group for Lateral Lumbar Spine Surgery were selected to collect expert feedback using the modified Delphi method where 65 spine surgeons from all over China agreed to participate. Four rounds were performed: 1 face-to-face meeting and 3 subsequent survey rounds. The consensus was achieved with ≥a 70.0% agreement for each question. The recommendation of grade A was defined as ≥90.0% of the agreement for each question. The recommendation of grade B was defined as 80.0-89.9% of the agreement for each question. The recommendation of grade C was defined as 70.0-79.9% of the agreement for each question. Results: A total of 65 experts formed a panelist group, and the number of questionnaires collected was 63, 59, and 62 in the 3 rounds. In total, 5 sections, 71 questions, and 382 items achieved consensus after the Delphi rounds including summary; preoperative evaluation; application at the lumbar spinal stenosis, lumbar disc herniation, lumbar spondylolisthesis, adult degenerative scoliosis, postoperative adjacent segmental degeneration, and revision surgery; complications; and postoperative follow-up evaluation of LLIF. Conclusion: The modified Delphi method was utilized to ascertain an expert consensus from the Chinese Study Group for Lateral Lumbar Spine Surgery to inform clinical decision-making in the application of LLIF. The salient grade A recommendations of the survey are enumerated.

Download Full-text