scholarly journals Freedom from disease in psoriasis: a Delphi consensus definition by patients, nurses and physicians

Author(s):  
I. Ee ◽  
E. Deprez ◽  
A. Egeberg ◽  
M. Augustin ◽  
C. Conrad ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 00399-2021
Author(s):  
Letizia Traversi ◽  
Marc Miravitlles ◽  
Miguel Angel Martinez-Garcia ◽  
Michal Shteinberg ◽  
Apostolos Bossios ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe coexistence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and bronchiectasis (BE) seems to be common and associated with a worse prognosis than for either disease individually. However, no definition of this association exists to guide researchers and clinicians.MethodsWe conducted a Delphi survey involving expert pulmonologists and radiologists from Europe, Turkey and Israel in order to define the “COPD-BE association”.A panel of 16 experts from EMBARC selected 35 statements for the survey after reviewing scientific literature. Invited participants, selected on the basis of expertise, geographical and gender distribution, were asked to express agreement on the statements. Consensus was defined as a score of ≥6 points (scale 0 to 9) in ≥70% of answers across two scoring rounds.ResultsA-hundred-and-two (72.3%) out of 141 invited experts participated the first round. Their response rate in the second round was 81%. The final consensus definition of “COPD-BE association” was: “The coexistence of (1) specific radiological findings (abnormal bronchial dilatation, airways visible within 1 cm of pleura and/or lack of tapering sign in ≥1 pulmonary segment and in >1 lobe) with (2) an obstructive pattern on spirometry (FEV1/FVC<0.7), (3) at least two characteristic symptoms (cough, expectoration, dyspnoea, fatigue, frequent infections) and (4) current or past exposure to smoke (≥10 pack-years) or other toxic agents (biomass, etc.)”. These criteria form the acronym “ROSE” (Radiology, Obstruction, Symptoms, Exposure).ConclusionsThe Delphi process formulated a European consensus definition of “COPD-BE association”. We hope this definition will have broad applicability across clinical practice and research in the future.



Author(s):  
David R. Bell ◽  
Traci Snedden ◽  
Kevin Biese ◽  
Evan Nelson ◽  
Andrew Watson ◽  
...  

Context: A single, widely accepted definition of sport specialization does not exist. A consensus definition is necessary to guide youth sport stakeholders on issues associated with sport specialization. Objective: The aim of this study was to develop a consensus definition of youth sport specialization and to identify elements that support the construct of specialization. Design: Delphi Study Setting: Directed Surveys Patients or Other Participants: A consensus panel of 17 experts was created to provide a broad multidisciplinary perspective on sport specialization in youth athletes. Data Collection and Analysis: The final definition was developed per an iterative process that involved four rounds of review. A comprehensive review of literature and expert input supported our initial proposed umbrella definition that included six additional elements. The study team reviewed the results after each round and changes were made to the definition based on panel feedback. Main Outcome Measure(s): Panel members were provided with the definition and six elements and then asked to rate each specific to importance, relevance, and clarity using a 4-point Likert scale. Results: In four Delphi consensus rounds, 17 experts reviewed the umbrella definition and six elements before consensus was reached. The umbrella definition and three of the initial six elements achieved &gt;80% agreement for importance, relevance, and clarity after the fourth round of review. The remaining 3 components did not reach &gt;80% agreement even after iterative edits and were removed. The process resulted in a final consensus definition: Sport specialization is intentional and focused participation in a single sport for a majority of the year that restricts opportunities for engagement in other sports and activities. Conclusions: A consensus-based conceptual definition for sport specialization has been developed using a Delphi method. This definition has important implications for clinicians and sports medicine professionals who support youth athletes.



2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Regina ◽  
Marie-Annick Le Pogam ◽  
Tapio Niemi ◽  
Rachid Akrour ◽  
Santino Pepe ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Sepsis is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Prompt recognition and management are critical to improved outcomes. In 2019, the Lausanne University Hospital (LUH) launched a quality of care project aiming to improve sepsis management. As part of this effort, we aimed to assess sepsis awareness among nurses and physicians of the LUH and among the local paramedics. Methods: We conducted a survey on nurses and physicians at our institution and local paramedics between January and October 2020 representing over 1,000 professionals distributed over all hospital departments. The survey assessed professionals’ knowledge of sepsis epidemiology, definition, recognition and initial evaluation (nurses and paramedics) or sepsis epidemiology, diagnosis, and management (physicians). Pediatrics and the neonatal unit were excluded. Results: A total of 1,116 of 1,216 contacted persons among the 4417 targeted population participated and completed the survey (participation rate 91.8%). This included 619 of 2,463 (25.1%) of hospital nurses, 348 of 1,664 (20.9 %) of physicians and 149 of 290 (51.4%) of canton paramedics. Our nurse and physician sample was slightly imbalanced for sex and age. Thirteen percent of participants (28.4% of physicians, 5.9% of nurses, 6.8% of paramedics) correctly identified the Sepsis-3 consensus definition. Similarly, 48.6% of physicians and 10.0% of nurses identified the SOFA (sequential organ failure assessment) score as a sepsis defining score for infected patients. Furthermore, 24% of participants identified the Quick Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (qSOFA) score as a predictor of increased mortality; 6% identified correctly the components of the score. For a patient with suspected sepsis, 96.1%, 91.6% and 75.8% of physicians respectively identified blood cultures, broad-spectrum antibiotics and fluid resuscitation as required interventions; 76.4% and 18.2% of physicians requested these initial measures within 1 and 3 hours, respectively. For physicians, recent training correlated with awareness regarding definitions, SOFA score and qSOFA score use and components: ORs (95%CI) 2.2 (1.4-3.6), 4.3 (2.7-6.7), 3.4 (2.2-5.2), and 2.6 (1.5-4.6), respectively).Conclusions: We identify a deficit of awareness among physicians, nurses and paramedics at LUH correlating with a lack of sepsis-specific training. Enhanced sepsis-specific educational efforts could significantly improve early identification and treatment of affected patients.





2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samantha Cukier ◽  
Manoj M. Lalu ◽  
Gregory L. Bryson ◽  
Kelly D. Cobey ◽  
Agnes Grudniewicz ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTBackgroundPosing as legitimate open access outlets, predatory journals and publishers threaten the integrity of academic publishing by not following publication best practices. Currently, there is no agreed upon definition of predatory journals, making it difficult for funders and academic institutions to generate practical guidance or policy to ensure their members do not publish in these channels.MethodsWe conducted a modified three-round Delphi survey of an international group of academics, funders, policy makers, journal editors, publishers and others, to generate a consensus definition of predatory journals and suggested ways the research community should respond to the problem.ResultsA total of 45 participants completed the survey on predatory journals and publishers. We reached consensus on 18 items out of a total of 33, to be included in a consensus definition of predatory journals and publishers. We came to consensus on educational outreach and policy initiatives on which to focus, including the development of a single checklist to detect predatory journals and publishers, and public funding to support research in this general area. We identified technological solutions to address the problem: a ‘one-stop-shop’ website to consolidate information on the topic and a ‘predatory journal research observatory’ to identify ongoing research and analysis about predatory journals/publishers.ConclusionsIn bringing together an international group of diverse stakeholders, we were able to use a modified Delphi process to inform the development of a definition of predatory journals and publishers. This definition will help institutions, funders and other stakeholders generate practical guidance on avoiding predatory journals and publishers.



2007 ◽  
Vol 177 (4S) ◽  
pp. 153-154
Author(s):  
Sean P. Stroup ◽  
Brian K. Auge ◽  
James O. L'Esperance ◽  
Jennifer Cullen ◽  
Song Kang


VASA ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 0220-0228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marion Vircoulon ◽  
Carine Boulon ◽  
Ileana Desormais ◽  
Philippe Lacroix ◽  
Victor Aboyans ◽  
...  

Background: We compared one-year amputation and survival rates in patients fulfilling 1991 European consensus critical limb ischaemia (CLI) definition to those clas, sified as CLI by TASC II but not European consensus (EC) definition. Patients and methods: Patients were selected from the COPART cohort of hospitalized patients with peripheral occlusive arterial disease suffering from lower extremity rest pain or ulcer and who completed one-year follow-up. Ankle and toe systolic pressures and transcutaneous oxygen pressure were measured. The patients were classified into two groups: those who could benefit from revascularization and those who could not (medical group). Within these groups, patients were separated into those who had CLI according to the European consensus definition (EC + TASC II: group A if revascularization, group C if medical treatment) and those who had no CLI by the European definition but who had CLI according to the TASC II definition (TASC: group B if revascularization and D if medical treatment). Results: 471 patients were included in the study (236 in the surgical group, 235 in the medical group). There was no difference according to the CLI definition for survival or cardiovascular event-free survival. However, major amputations were more frequent in group A than in group B (25 vs 12 %, p = 0.046) and in group C than in group D (38 vs 20 %, p = 0.004). Conclusions: Major amputation is twice as frequent in patients with CLI according to the historical European consensus definition than in those classified to the TASC II definition but not the EC. Caution is required when comparing results of recent series to historical controls. The TASC II definition of CLI is too wide to compare patients from clinical trials so we suggest separating these patients into two different stages: permanent (TASC II but not EC definition) and critical ischaemia (TASC II and EC definition).



2019 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberta Rossini ◽  
Giorgio Quadri ◽  
Andrea Rognoni ◽  
Federico Nardi ◽  
Ferdinando Varbella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document