Clinical consensus on treatments for transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: double-blinded Delphi panel.

Aim: Obtain clinical consensus on factors impacting first-line prescribing for transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM).Materials & methods: A double-blinded, modified Delphi panel was employed. USA-based hematologists/oncologists who treat TIE patients with NDMM were selected as expert panelists.Results: Consensus was reached that patient frailty, performance status, comorbidities, treatment efficacy, and adverse event profile affect first-line prescribing. All panelists agreed it is important to use the most efficacious treatment first; 88% of panelists considered daratumumab-containing regimens the most efficacious. Panelists agreed treatment should be continued until progression while benefits outweigh risk.Conclusion: Findings reinforce the importance of using the most efficacious regimen upfront for TIE NDMM, and nearly all panelists considered daratumumab-containing regimens the most efficacious treatment.

The purpose of this study was to determine the latest clinician preferences and opinions on factors affecting initial treatment selection for people recently diagnosed with multiple myeloma and unable to receive a bone marrow transplant, and to understand challenges with current treatments used in clinical practice. A panel of doctors with an average of two decades of experience treating blood disorders and cancers were recruited as expert panelists. Experts discussed treatment options by completing two rounds of surveys on treatment and one round of discussion. All experts agreed that the most effective treatment should be used first. Most experts considered treatment containing the drug daratumumab to be the most effective. Experts agreed that treatment should be continued until the cancer worsens if the treatment offers more benefits than side effects.

Facets of physical function assessed by patient-reported outcome measures in oncology research.

PURPOSE: The U.S. Food & Drug Administration has identified physical functioning (PF) as a core patient-reported outcome (PRO) in cancer clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to identify PF PRO measures (PROMs) in adult cancer populations and classify the PROMs by content covered (facets of PF) in each measure. METHODS: As part of the Patient Reports of Physical Functioning Study (PROPS) research program, we conducted a targeted literature review to identify PROMs that could be used in clinical trials to evaluate PF from the patient perspective. Next, we convened an advisory panel to conduct a modified, reactive, Delphi study to reach consensus on which PF facets are assessed by PROMs identified in the review. The panel engaged in a "card sort" activity to classify PROM items by PF facets. Consensus was reached when 80% of panel members agreed that at least one facet was being measured by each PROM item. RESULTS: The literature review identified 13 PROMs that met inclusion criteria. Eight facets of PF were identified for classification in the Delphi study: ability, completion, difficulty, limitation, quality, frequency, bother, and satisfaction. Through two rounds, the panel documented and classified conceptual approaches for each PRO item presented. The most prevalent PF facets were ability, difficulty, and limitation. CONCLUSION: Classifying PF PROMs by PF facets will promote more consistent communication regarding the aspects of PF represented in each PROM, helping researchers prioritize measures for inclusion in cancer clinical trials.

Priorities and challenges in social and healthcare policies for older people living in the Mediterranean basin: A Delphi panel study.

BACKGROUND: Recently, the countries in the Mediterranean basin (which share cultural ties) have been showing a common trend of declining social support for the elderly, with deficiencies in social care models for this demographic. Thus, this Delphi panel study analyzed the gaps in social and integrated care among the participating countries in a European research project. METHODS: This three-round Delphi panel study focused on the European countries of Greece and Spain and the non-European countries of Egypt, Lebanon, and Tunisia. In this project, experts were identified according to their level of expertise in the subject matter, their gender, and their membership in different social groups. Subsequently, they were asked to identify the current situation of social care, set future goals, and locate the gaps regarding the social and healthcare models for older people in the participating countries. The median score (Mdn) and interquartile range (IQR) were calculated to assess the degree of consensus on the different priorities. RESULTS: Among the participating countries, there was a lack of state agreements to maintain social care models, a lack of coordination between public and private institutions to provide social care services, territorial inequalities in terms of access and coverage of rights, and job insecurity for professionals. The desired situation was to integrate social and healthcare services with a person-centered social care model, thus promoting autonomy and empowering users and families in participation and decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: This Delphi study reveals significant disparities in social and healthcare policies for older adults across Mediterranean countries, highlighting shared challenges and specific national needs. European nations like Greece and Spain face fragmented systems, while non-European countries such as Lebanon, Egypt, and Tunisia lack specialized geriatric services and social security. All countries urgently need better professional training, social and economic empowerment of older adults, and integrated national strategies. These findings offer key insights for policymakers to develop equitable, sustainable solutions for aging populations.

Developing mental health curricula and a service provision model for clinical associates in South Africa: a Delphi survey of family physicians and psychiatrists.

BACKGROUND: Clinical associates are a health professional cadre that could be utilised in mental health task sharing in South Africa but this is training dependent. The objectives of the study were to identify the potential curricula content, training sites, and teaching modalities for undergraduate and potential postgraduate clinical associate mental health training and to identify the tasks that they should perform based on these curricula. METHODS: We utilised the Delphi method to reach consensus on items with the panel comprising psychiatrists and family physicians. The first round questionnaire of the Delphi survey was developed based on a literature review and the results from earlier phases of the overall study. The survey was administered electronically and consisted of three rounds. Following both the first and second rounds, an updated questionnaire was constructed omitting the items on which consensus was reached. The questionnaire consisted primarily of nine-point scales with consensus based on 70% of participants rating 1,2,3 or 7,8,9. RESULTS: There were 26 participants in the first round with this number falling to 23 in later rounds. There was strong consensus on a training attachment to a mental health clinic at a community health centre (CHC) at undergraduate (96.2%) and postgraduate level (100%). Consensus was reached on the importance of training on the management of six categories of disorders at the undergraduate level and nine categories of disorders at the postgraduate level. Clerking patients as a teaching modality reached 100% consensus at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels. PHC clinics, CHCs and district hospitals reached consensus as appropriate settings for clinical associates to provide mental health services. In addition, GP practices and secondary hospitals reached consensus for those with postgraduate training. Consensus was reached on ten of the 21 listed tasks that could be performed based on undergraduate training and 20 of the 21 tasks based on a postgraduate qualification in mental health. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi panel's recommendations provide a clear roadmap for enhancing mental health curricula for clinical associates, enabling their utilisation in mental health service provision. A future postgraduate mental health qualification for clinical associates would allow for expanded task sharing.

International consensus for a dissection room quality system (DRQS): A Delphi panel study.

Dissection Rooms (DRs) are key facilities that allow teaching and research on human anatomy, where students and researchers work with human bodies to acquire, increase, or create new knowledge. Usually, DRs work with a Body Donation Program (BDP), where living donors bequeath their bodies for use in teaching and research after they expire. Despite DRs being part of universities worldwide, no common guidelines, regulations, or quality management systems (QMS) exist that could be applied to different countries. With that purpose in mind, we aimed to develop a QMS that could be applied to DRs globally, using a Delphi panel to achieve consensus about the items that should constitute the QMS. The panel was constituted by 20 anatomy professors from 20 different countries, and the 167 standards to create the rules or guidelines that constitute the QMS were divided in five categories: direction, body donation, students, instructors, and research. After two rounds of revisions, 150 standards were considered "essential" or "important" by more than 70% of the participants, thus being incorporated to the Dissection Room Quality System (DRQS). The results of this panel represent a minimum list of items of the DRQS for improving the functioning of DRs globally.

Recommendations to Improve Management of Incidental Pulmonary Nodules in Canada: Expert Panel Consensus.

Introduction: Incidental pulmonary nodules (IPN) are common radiologic findings, yet management of IPNs is inconsistent across Canada. This study aims to improve IPN management based on multidisciplinary expert consensus and provides recommendations to overcome patient and system-level barriers. Methods: A modified Delphi consensus technique was conducted. Multidisciplinary experts with extensive experience in lung nodule management in Canada were recruited to participate in the panel. A survey was administered in 3 rounds, using a 5-point Likert scale to determine the level of agreement (1 = extremely agree, 5 = extremely disagree). Results: Eleven experts agreed to participate in the panel; 10 completed all 3 rounds. Consensus was achieved for 183/217 (84.3%) statements. Panellists agreed that radiology reports should include a standardized summary of findings and follow-up recommendations for all nodule sizes (ie, <6, 6-8, and >8 mm). There was strong consensus regarding the importance of an automated system for patient follow-up and that leadership support for organizational change at the administrative level is of utmost importance in improving IPN management. There was no consensus on the need for standardized national referral pathways, development of new guidelines, or establishing a uniform picture archiving and communication system. Conclusion: Canadian IPN experts agree that improved IPN management should include standardized radiology reporting of IPNs, standardized and automated follow-up of patients with IPNs, guideline adherence and implementation, and leadership support for organizational change. Future research should focus on the implementation and long-term effectiveness of these recommendations in clinical practice.

Current treatment landscape of HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer in the Nordics: a modified Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: This Delphi study aimed to assess current perspectives on hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative(HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (aBC) treatment strategies across the Nordics, and to establish where consensus exists across the Nordics on HR+/HER2- aBC treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A modified, three-round Delphi method was followed. A steering committee was appointed for study coordination, panellist selection, and questionnaire development. The questionnaires covered relevant topics on HR+/HER2- aBC treatment: treatment patterns in different lines of therapy (first [1L], second [2L], and third [3L]), oligometastatic disease, de novo aBC, brain metastases, age as influential factor, visceral crisis, radiotherapy, diagnostics, and clinical guidelines. Both open and closed-ended questions were included. Consensus was defined as at least 70% agreement. RESULTS: In total, 28 experienced BC oncologists participated in the study from all five Nordic countries. Overall, topics reaching consensus included: preferred treatment approach in 1L and 2L therapy, treatment of oligometastatic disease, visceral crisis, brain metastases, and age-related treatment considerations. No consensus was reached for 3L therapy and local treatment for primary tumour in de novo aBC. Endocrine therapy (ET) combined with a cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)4/6 inhibitor was the treatment of choice for 1L and 2L therapy. Treatment patterns in clinical practice did not always follow recommendations in current Nordic guidelines, as seen in the case of recently approved treatments. DISCUSSION: ET in combination with a CDK4/6 inhibitor is the preferred frontline treatment for HR+/HER2- aBC in the Nordics. The observed discrepancy between current guidelines and clinical practice could be due to differences in the reimbursement of novel treatments in the Nordics. Collaborative research efforts are warranted for topics that lack consensus.

A form to report pain assessment and monitoring in the oncology clinical record: a Delphi process.

Background: Treatment of cancer pain remains suboptimal worldwide. In Italy, a law requires that pain be regularly assessed and reported in both medical and nursing records. Aim: To provide a homogeneous form to get exhaustive clinical information in the clinical report according to Italian legislation. Methods: A board, including oncologists and pain therapists, designed a form to report the pain characteristics of cancer patients in Italy in clinical records. The form was voted on through a Delphi process among directors of 18 clinical oncology specialization schools in Italy to obtain agreement on its content. Results: A form useful for collecting and reporting comprehensive and homogeneous information on pain among oncologists in Italy was produced. Conclusion: The development of common strategies for pain management can be improved by using this tool.

Defining ruxolitinib failure and transition to next-line therapy for patients with myelofibrosis: a modified Delphi panel consensus study.

Aim: To define ruxolitinib failure and develop parameters to guide transition to next-line therapy for patients with myelofibrosis. Methods: A modified Delphi panel with 14 hematologists-oncologists. Survey concepts included defining primary refractory status, loss of response, disease progression, intolerance and transition to next-line therapy. Results: Ruxolitinib failure may be defined as no improvement in symptoms or spleen size, progressive disease or ruxolitinib intolerance, following a maximally tolerated dose for ≥3 months. Loss of spleen response 1 month after initial response may prompt discontinuation. Lack of evidence to inform transition to next-line therapy was noted; tapering ruxolitinib should be considered according to ruxolitinib dose and patient characteristics. Conclusion: Expert consensus was provided on defining ruxolitinib failure and transition to next-line therapy as summarized in this position paper, which may support considerations in the development of future clinical practice guidelines.

People with myelofibrosis who receive treatment with ruxolitinib may need to stop treatment because it is not working or they cannot tolerate the side effects. There is little good scientific information available about how and when to stop ruxolitinib treatment, and how to move to another treatment after stopping ruxolitinib. A group of clinical experts in hematology and oncology followed a scientific process, called the Delphi method, to discuss this topic and to reach agreement on the most important aspects of this challenge. The experts agreed that ruxolitinib failure may be defined as having no improvement in symptoms or spleen size, progressive disease or ruxolitinib intolerance, after the patient was receiving the highest dose they could tolerate for ≥3 months. The results of this expert discussion may support patients and their healthcare providers making decisions in real life, and development of future clinical practice guidelines.

Management of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis in clinical practice: Results of the expert consensus using the Delphi methodology.

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a rare disease characterized by a progressive and irreversible degeneration of upper and lower motor neurons leading to death. In France, limited data exist describing the criteria used in clinical practice for diagnosis and follow-up, and how novel therapies may fit in. The objective of this Delphi panel was to obtain an overview of current French practices in ALS diagnosis, management, and follow-up by determining the scales and criteria used in clinical practice outside of clinical trials, as well as the place of a future treatment like AMX0035, acting on endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress and mitochondrial dysfunction, in the current therapeutic strategies. A questionnaire was administered to 24 ALS healthcare providers practicing in ALS centers in France. Two rounds of remote voting were organized, before proposition of final consensus statements. Consensus was considered reached when at least 66% of the voters agreed. Consensus were obtained to define the new Gold Coast criteria as the ones used in clinical practice to establish the diagnosis of ALS, thus replacing the revised El Escorial criteria, considered too complex and now mainly used to characterize the patient populations to be included in clinical trials. The clinical factors considered to establish ALS diagnosis are mainly the demonstration of progression of the motor deficit and elimination of differential diagnoses. The ALSFRS-R scale is used in daily clinical practice to assess patient's functional impairment in terms of number of points lost, with the bulbar, respiratory, and fine motor subscores being the most important to evaluate independently. A critical medical need was identified regarding the provision of new therapeutic alternatives in ALS. The panel members would support the earliest management of patients. In this landscape, based on data from a very encouraging phase II (Centaur trial), AMX0035 represents a new tool of choice in current treatment strategies for all patients for whom experts are confident in the diagnosis of ALS, in combination with riluzole. These results will need to be confirmed by the ongoing phase III trial (Phoenix trial).

Improving the understanding of how patients with non-dystrophic myotonia are selected for myotonia treatment with mexiletine (NaMuscla): outcomes of treatment impact using a European Delphi panel.

BACKGROUND: Non-dystrophic myotonias (NDMs) comprise muscle chloride and sodium channelopathies due to genetic defects of the CLCN1- and SCN4A-channels. No licensed antimyotonic treatment has been available until approval of mexiletine (NaMuscla®) for adult patients by the EMA in December 2018. This Delphi panel aimed to understand how outcomes of the pivotal phase III Mexiletine study (MYOMEX) translate to real world practice and investigate health resource use, quality of life and the natural history of NDM to support economic modelling and facilitate patient access. METHODS: Nine clinical experts in treating NDM took part in a two-round Delphi panel. Their knowledge of NDM and previous use of mexiletine as an off-label treatment prior to NaMuscla's approval ensured they could provide both qualitative context and quantitative estimates to support economic modelling comparing mexiletine (NaMuscla) to best supportive care. Consensus in four key areas was sought: healthcare resource utilization (HRU), treatment with mexiletine (NaMuscla), patient quality of life (QoL), and the natural history of disease. Concept questions were also asked, considering perceptions on the feasibility of mapping the validated Individualized Neuromuscular Quality of Life (INQoL) instrument to the generic EQ-5D™, and the potential impact on caregiver QoL. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved for key questions including the average long-term dosage of mexiletine (NaMuscla) in practice, the criteria for eligibility of myotonia treatment, the clinical importance of QoL outcomes in MYOMEX, the higher proportion of patients with increased QoL, and the reduction in the need for mental health resources for patients receiving mexiletine (NaMuscla). While consensus was not achieved for other questions, the results demonstrated that most experts felt mexiletine (NaMuscla) reduced the need for HRU and was expected to improve QoL. The QoL mapping exercise suggested that it is feasible to map domains of INQoL to EQ-5D. Points of interest for future research were identified, including that mexiletine (NaMuscla) may slow the annual decrease in QoL of patients over their lifetime, and a significant negative impact on QoL for some caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: This project successfully provided data from an informed group of clinical experts, complementing the currently available clinical trial data for mexiletine (NaMuscla) to support patient access decisions.

Is a treat-to-target strategy in osteoporosis applicable in clinical practice? Consensus among a panel of European experts.

A panel of European experts was convened to establish consensus on a treat-to-target strategy in osteoporosis. Panellists agreed that the ultimate goals of treating osteoporosis are recovering pre-fracture functional level and reducing subsequent fracture risk; there was consensus that total hip bone mineral density is currently the most appropriate treatment target in clinical practice. INTRODUCTION: A modified Delphi approach was convened to establish consensus among European experts on best practice management for patients with fragility fractures and whether a treat-to-target (T2T) strategy is applicable in osteoporosis. METHODS: A panel of 12 clinical experts (from eight European countries) voted on 13 final statements relating to a T2T strategy for osteoporosis across three rounds of blinded, remotely conducted electronic surveys (Likert scale: 'strongly disagree', 'disagree', 'unable to answer', 'agree', 'strongly agree'). When panellists disagreed, they were asked how the statement could be adjusted to allow for a positive response, which was used to refine the statement for the following round. Consensus was defined as ≥ 75% agreement with a statement. Panellists were selected by UCB Pharma, which provided financial and logistical support. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 13/13 statements. Panellists agreed that the most important goals for fragility fracture patients are recovery of pre-fracture functional level and reduction of subsequent fracture risk. There was also consensus that a T2T strategy is applicable to osteoporosis and that bone mineral density (BMD) is currently the most clinically appropriate target. With regard to the definition of a specific BMD treatment target and timeframes applicable to T2T in osteoporosis, no clear consensus was reached; panellists emphasised that these would need to be individually determined. CONCLUSIONS: According to a panel of European experts, the main goals of fracture management are to recover pre-fracture functional level and reduce fracture risk. Total hip BMD seems to be the most clinically appropriate treatment target within a T2T strategy.

Eight Priorities for Improving Primary Care Access Management in Healthcare Organizations: Results of a Modified Delphi Stakeholder Panel.

OBJECTIVE: To identify priorities for improving healthcare organization management of patient access to primary care based on prior evidence and a stakeholder panel. BACKGROUND: Studies on healthcare access show its importance for ensuring population health. Few studies show how healthcare organizations can improve access. METHODS: We conducted a modified Delphi stakeholder panel anchored by a systematic review. Panelists (N = 20) represented diverse stakeholder groups including patients, providers, policy makers, purchasers, and payers of healthcare services, predominantly from the Veterans Health Administration. A pre-panel survey addressed over 80 aspects of healthcare organization management of access, including defining access management. Panelists discussed survey-based ratings during a 2-day in-person meeting and re-voted afterward. A second panel process focused on each final priority and developed recommendations and suggestions for implementation. RESULTS: The panel achieved consensus on definitions of optimal access and access management on eight urgent and important priorities for guiding access management improvement, and on 1-3 recommendations per priority. Each recommendation is supported by referenced, panel-approved suggestions for implementation. Priorities address two organizational structure targets (interdisciplinary primary care site leadership; clearly identified group practice management structure); four process improvements (patient telephone access management; contingency staffing; nurse management of demand through care coordination; proactive demand management by optimizing provider visit schedules), and two outcomes (quality of patients' experiences of access; provider and staff morale). Recommendations and suggestions for implementation, including literature references, are summarized in a panelist-approved, ready-to-use tool. CONCLUSIONS: A stakeholder panel informed by a pre-panel systematic review identified eight action-oriented priorities for improving access and recommendations for implementing each priority. The resulting tool is suitable for guiding the VA and other integrated healthcare delivery organizations in assessing and initiating improvements in access management, and for supporting continued research.

Vulvovaginal atrophy (VVA) in breast cancer survivors (BCS) is still an unmet medical need: results of an Italian Delphi Panel.

PURPOSE: VVA is a common disease, with approximately 50% of all postmenopausal women having related symptoms. VVA has a significant impact on the personal and sexual lives and on many aspects of women's self-esteem and emotional well-being. It is particularly frequent and severe in patients treated for BC, where it originates significant economic and social costs. Given the lack of published evidence on this subject, a Delphi Panel was carried out to evaluate:The epidemiology of VVA and of its risk-factors/comorbidities in ItalyThe present standard of care and unmet medical needsThe comparison between recent US epidemiological data and the Italian situationThe health resources used in VVA BC The burden of illnessDespite the considerable negative impact on quality of life, a disparity between the high prevalence of this condition and the infrequent clinical diagnosis is documented in medical practice and in surveys. This inaccuracy is thought to be primarily a consequence of patients' unwillingness and/or reluctance to report symptoms in the clinical setting and of health-care professional's difficulty in approaching this sensitive topic during routine consultations. METHODS: A Delphi Panel methodology was used: a first round of written questionnaires, followed by a plenary meeting with a facilitator and by two additional rounds of telephone interviews. RESULTS: The prevalence of the condition in Italy can be estimated in 115,000 cases out of 380,000 BC survivors. The Panel confirmed that the epidemiological findings of a recent pharmacoeconomic analysis of a US claims database can be applied to Italian patient population. The Panel confirmed also an estimate of 4.25 additional cases/100/yr of UTI (urinary tract infection) in VVA BC patients (vs. a non-VVA-matched population), of 3.68 additional cases of vulvovaginitis, of 6.97 cases of climacteric symptoms, and of 3.64 cases of bone and joint disorders. As far as the resource use is concerned, in the VVA BC populations, 33.4 additional gynecological visits/100/year can be expected, along with 22.8 additional cancer screenings, 7.07 additional outpatient visits and 5.04 screenings for HPV. CONCLUSIONS: Even in Italy, a diagnosis of VVA, especially in a BC population, is associated with a relevant increase in the burden of illness and social costs, compared to a control population matched for age without VVA. This is due essentially to an increase in comorbidities and resource utilization with the consequence that an adequate treatment could reduce the impact of the condition.

Defining ambulatory care sensitive conditions for adults in Portugal.

BACKGROUND: Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions (ACSCs) are health conditions for which adequate management, treatment and interventions delivered in the ambulatory care setting could potentially prevent hospitalization. Which conditions are sensitive to ambulatory care varies according to the scope of health care services and the context in which the indicator is used. The need for a country-specific validated list for Portugal has already been identified, but currently no national list exists. The objective of this study was to develop a list of Ambulatory Care Sensitive Conditions for Portugal. METHODS: A modified web-based Delphi panel approach was designed, in order to determine which conditions can be considered ACSCs in the Portuguese adult population. The selected experts were general practitioners and internal medicine physicians identified by the most relevant Portuguese scientific societies. Experts were presented with previously identified ACSC and asked to select which could be accepted in the Portuguese context. They were also asked to identify other conditions they considered relevant. We estimated the number and cost of ACSC hospitalizations in 2017 in Portugal according to the identified conditions. RESULTS: After three rounds the experts agreed on 34 of the 45 initially proposed items. Fourteen new conditions were proposed and four achieved consensus, namely uterine cervical cancer, colorectal cancer, thromboembolic venous disease and voluntary termination of pregnancy. In 2017 133,427 hospitalizations were for ACSC (15.7% of all hospitalizations). This represents a rate of 1685 per 100,000 adults. The most frequent diagnosis were pneumonia, heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease/chronic bronchitis, urinary tract infection, colorectal cancer, hypertensive disease atrial fibrillation and complications of diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSIONS: New ACSC were identified. It is expected that this list could be used henceforward by epidemiologic studies, health services research and for healthcare management purposes. ACSC lists should be updated frequently. Further research is necessary to increase the specificity of ACSC hospitalizations as an indicator of healthcare performance.

A core syllabus for the teaching of gross anatomy of the thorax to medical students.

Discussion is ongoing concerning the need to ensure the clinical relevance of the biomedical sciences. However, clinical relevance within health care courses presupposes that there is internationally agreed core material to be taught and learned. For anatomy, by the initial use of Delphi Panels that comprise anatomists, scientists, and clinicians, the International Federation of Associations of Anatomists (IFAAs) is developing internationally accepted core syllabuses for all anatomical sciences disciplines in the health care professions. In this article, the deliberations of a Delphi Panel for the teaching of thoracic anatomy in the medical curriculum are presented, prior to their publication on the IFAA's website. To develop the syllabus further, it is required that anatomical societies, as well as individual anatomists and clinicians, comment upon, elaborate, and amend this draft recommended syllabus. The aim is to set internationally recognized standards and thus to provide guidelines concerning the knowledge of the human thorax expected of graduating medical professionals. Such information should be borne in mind by those involved in the development of medical courses. Clin. Anat. 33:300-315, 2020. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Relevant patient characteristics for estimating healthcare needs according to healthcare providers and people with type 2 diabetes: a Delphi survey.

BACKGROUND: Recently, there has been growing interest in providing more tailored, patient-centered care for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Yet it remains unclear which patient characteristics should be determined to guide such an approach. Therefore, the opinions of healthcare providers (HCP) and people with T2DM about relevant patient characteristics for estimating healthcare needs of people with T2DM were assessed and compared. METHODS: Two separate online Delphi studies were conducted according to the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method: one with HCPs (n = 22) from Dutch primary and secondary care and one with people with T2DM treated in Dutch primary care (n = 46). The relevance of patient characteristics for estimating healthcare needs, defined as the number of yearly consultations, was assessed on a 5-point Likert scale. Characteristics with a median of 4 or 5 and an interquartile range ≤ 1.5 were considered relevant with consensus. Participants were also asked to select the top 5 of most relevant patient characteristics. To determine the overall top 5, the mean relative importance score of each characteristic was calculated. RESULTS: In two Delphi rounds, 28 and 15 patient characteristics were rated by HCPs and people with T2DM, respectively. Both HCPs and people with T2DM found health-related characteristics relevant for estimating healthcare needs of people with T2DM. However, HCPs preferred to estimate healthcare needs using person- and context-related characteristics. They ranked self-efficacy as the most relevant estimator. In contrast, people with T2DM were more in favor of health-related characteristics and ranked HbA1c as the most relevant estimator. CONCLUSIONS: The findings show that there is discrepancy in opinions on relevant patient characteristics for estimating healthcare needs between HCPs and people with T2DM. To achieve more tailored, patient-centered care, it is important that both groups agree on the topics to be discussed during patient consultations.

Development and content validation of a preliminary core set of patient- and caregiver-relevant outcomes for inclusion in a potential composite endpoint for Dravet Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Dravet Syndrome (DS) is a rare developmental and epileptic encephalopathy characterized by multiple seizures, frequently prolonged and treatment refractory, with significant developmental disabilities and behavioral and psychiatric disorders. Patients with DS require intensive support and supervision from a caregiver, impacting significantly on both patients' and caregivers' lives. This study aimed to identify core concepts to measure the impact on both patients and caregivers in future DS clinical trials. METHODS: Qualitative concept elicitation interviews were conducted with caregivers and healthcare professionals involved in caring for children with DS (aged 2-18years) in France to identify important concepts related to the global impact of DS. Interviews explored a range of concepts, including triggers, symptoms, impacts, and coping strategies, from which a conceptual model was developed. A Delphi consensus panel with eight international clinical experts aimed to identify important and relevant endpoints. RESULTS: Seizure was the most commonly reported symptom with DS further impacting children's cognitive and behavioral functioning. Caregivers identified impact concepts not reported by healthcare professionals. Both groups described additional impacts on wider family members and home modifications. Clinical experts agreed on the inclusion of five patient- and caregiver-relevant concepts for measurement in future DS clinical trials in a composite endpoint. The five concepts for inclusion were; seizures, expressive communication of the child, receptive communication of the child, impact on daily activities, and social functioning of the caregiver. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed the wider potential impact of DS to extend beyond that of seizures, demonstrating that there is a need for additional patient- and caregiver-relevant concepts to be measured in clinical trials to fully identify the value of therapeutic interventions.

Development and initial validation of a clinical measure to assess early symptoms of post-stroke depression in the acute stroke patient.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate a measure specifically developed to clinically assess early symptoms of poststroke depression (PSD) in acute stroke patients. BACKGROUND: Poststroke depression is associated with elevated rates of morbidity and mortality following a mild-to-moderate stroke. Measures currently used to assess depression in acute poststroke patients can lack the clinical specificity necessary to detect symptoms within 30 days poststroke. DESIGN: A two-round Delphi design was used to estimate symptom consensus. METHODS: Three panels, healthcare professionals (N = 74), experts (N = 16) and acute poststroke patients (N = 40), evaluated an initial set of symptom-items systematically developed by the research team. RESULTS: Our study yielded consensus for 29 symptom-items. Additional symptoms recommended by acute poststroke patients increased the final number of symptoms to 35. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a specific measure of early symptoms of PSD in acute stroke patients with good content validity. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The specific clinical relevance of our findings lies in the consensus of health professionals, the Delphi panel and patients regarding core areas of clinical assessment during the acute poststroke phase. And our findings may draw attention to the need to assess and treat acute stroke patients with early symptoms of PSD.

A protocol for the development of a critical thinking assessment tool for nurses using a Delphi technique.

AIM: The aim of this study was to develop an assessment tool to measure the critical thinking ability of nurses. BACKGROUND: As an increasing number of complex patients are admitted to hospitals, the importance of nurses recognizing changes in health status and picking up on deterioration is more important. To detect early signs of complication requires critical thinking skills. Registered Nurses are expected to commence their clinical careers with the necessary critical thinking skills to ensure safe nursing practice. Currently, there is no published tool to assess critical thinking skills which is context specific to Australian nurses. DESIGN: A modified Delphi study will be used for the project. METHODS: This study will develop a series of unfolding case scenarios using national health data with multiple-choice questions to assess critical thinking. Face validity of the scenarios will be determined by an expert reference group of clinical and academic nurses. A Delphi study will determine the answers to scenario questions. Panel members will be expert clinicians and educators from two states in Australia. Rasch analysis of the questionnaire will assess validity and reliability of the tool. Funding for the study and Research Ethics Committee approval were obtained in March and November 2016, respectively. DISCUSSION: Patient outcomes and safety are directly linked to nurses' critical thinking skills. This study will develop an assessment tool to provide a standardized method of measuring nurses' critical thinking skills across Australia. This will provide healthcare providers with greater confidence in the critical thinking level of graduate Registered Nurses.