Browsing by Subject "Delphi Technique"
Now showing 1 - 8 of 8
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access A novel classification system for spinal instability in neoplastic disease: an evidence-based approach and expert consensus from the Spine Oncology Study Group.(Spine, 2010-10) Fisher, Charles G; DiPaola, Christian P; Ryken, Timothy C; Bilsky, Mark H; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Berven, Sigurd H; Harrop, James S; Fehlings, Michael G; Boriani, Stefano; Chou, Dean; Schmidt, Meic H; Polly, David W; Biagini, Roberto; Burch, Shane; Dekutoski, Mark B; Ganju, Aruna; Gerszten, Peter C; Gokaslan, Ziya L; Groff, Michael W; Liebsch, Norbert J; Mendel, Ehud; Okuno, Scott H; Patel, Shreyaskumar; Rhines, Laurence D; Rose, Peter S; Sciubba, Daniel M; Sundaresan, Narayan; Tomita, Katsuro; Varga, Peter P; Vialle, Luiz R; Vrionis, Frank D; Yamada, Yoshiya; Fourney, Daryl RStudy design
Systematic review and modified Delphi technique.Objective
To use an evidence-based medicine process using the best available literature and expert opinion consensus to develop a comprehensive classification system to diagnose neoplastic spinal instability.Summary of background data
Spinal instability is poorly defined in the literature and presently there is a lack of guidelines available to aid in defining the degree of spinal instability in the setting of neoplastic spinal disease. The concept of spinal instability remains important in the clinical decision-making process for patients with spine tumors.Methods
We have integrated the evidence provided by systematic reviews through a modified Delphi technique to generate a consensus of best evidence and expert opinion to develop a classification system to define neoplastic spinal instability.Results
A comprehensive classification system based on patient symptoms and radiographic criteria of the spine was developed to aid in predicting spine stability of neoplastic lesions. The classification system includes global spinal location of the tumor, type and presence of pain, bone lesion quality, spinal alignment, extent of vertebral body collapse, and posterolateral spinal element involvement. Qualitative scores were assigned based on relative importance of particular factors gleaned from the literature and refined by expert consensus.Conclusion
The Spine Instability Neoplastic Score is a comprehensive classification system with content validity that can guide clinicians in identifying when patients with neoplastic disease of the spine may benefit from surgical consultation. It can also aid surgeons in assessing the key components of spinal instability due to neoplasia and may become a prognostic tool for surgical decision-making when put in context with other key elements such as neurologic symptoms, extent of disease, prognosis, patient health factors, oncologic subtype, and radiosensitivity of the tumor.Item Open Access An international consensus on the appropriate evaluation and treatment for adults with spinal deformity.(European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2018-03) Berven, Sigurd H; Kamper, Steven J; Germscheid, Niccole M; Dahl, Benny; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Lenke, Lawrence G; Lewis, Stephen J; Cheung, Kenneth M; Alanay, Ahmet; Ito, Manabu; Polly, David W; Qiu, Yong; de Kleuver, Marinus; AOSpine Knowledge Forum DeformityPurpose
Evaluation and surgical management for adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients varies between health care providers. The purpose of this study is to identify appropriateness of specific approaches and management strategies for the treatment of ASD.Methods
From January to July 2015, the AOSpine Knowledge Deformity Forum performed a modified Delphi survey where 53 experienced deformity surgeons from 24 countries, rated the appropriateness of management strategies for multiple ASD clinical scenarios. Four rounds were performed: three surveys and a face-to-face meeting. Consensus was achieved with ≥70% agreement.Results
Appropriate surgical goals are improvement of function, pain, and neural symptoms. Appropriate preoperative patient evaluation includes recording information on history and comorbidities, and radiographic workup, including long standing films and MRI for all patients. Preoperative pulmonary and cardiac testing and DEXA scan is appropriate for at-risk patients. Intraoperatively, appropriate surgical strategies include long fusions with deformity correction for patients with large deformity and sagittal imbalance, and pelvic fixation for multilevel fusions with large curves, sagittal imbalance, and osteoporosis. Decompression alone is inappropriate in patients with large curves, sagittal imbalance, and progressive deformity. It is inappropriate to fuse to L5 in patients with symptomatic disk degeneration at L5-S1.Conclusions
These results provide guidance for informed decision-making in the evaluation and management of ASD. Appropriate care for ASD, a very diverse spectrum of disease, must be responsive to patient preference and values, and considerations of the care provider, and the healthcare system. A monolithic approach to care should be avoided.Item Open Access Diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD) for children and adolescents: An international Delphi study-Part 1-Development of Axis I.(Journal of oral rehabilitation, 2021-07) Rongo, Roberto; Ekberg, EwaCarin; Nilsson, Ing-Marie; Al-Khotani, Amal; Alstergren, Per; Conti, Paulo Cesar Rodrigues; Durham, Justin; Goulet, Jean-Paul; Hirsch, Christian; Kalaykova, Stanimira I; Kapos, Flavia P; Komiyama, Osamu; Koutris, Michail; List, Thomas; Lobbezoo, Frank; Ohrbach, Richard; Peck, Christopher C; Restrepo, Claudia; Rodrigues, Maria Joao; Sharma, Sonia; Svensson, Peter; Visscher, Corine M; Wahlund, Kerstin; Michelotti, AmbraBackground
Since in children and adolescence prevalence is assessed mainly on self-reported or proxy-reported signs and symptoms; there is a need to develop a more comprehensive standardised process for the collection of clinical information and the diagnosis of TMD in these populations.Objective
To develop new instruments and to adapt the diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD) for the evaluation of TMD in children and adolescents.Method
A modified Delphi method was used to seek international consensus among TMD experts. Fourteen clinicians and researchers in the field of oro-facial pain and TMD worldwide were invited to participate in a workshop initiated by the International Network for Orofacial Pain and Related Disorders Methodology (INfORM scientific network) at the General Session of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR, London 2018), as the first step in the Delphi process. Participants discussed the protocols required to make physical diagnoses included in the Axis I of the DC/TMD. Thereafter, nine experts in the field were added, and the first Delphi round was created. This survey included 60 statements for Axis I, and the experts were asked to respond to each statement on a five-item Likert scale ranging from 'Strongly disagree' to 'Strongly agree'. Consensus level was set at 80% agreement for the first round, and at 70% for the next.Results
After three rounds of the Delphi process, a consensus among TMD experts was achieved and two adapted DC/TMD protocols for Axis I physical diagnoses for children and adolescents were developed.Conclusion
Through international consensus among TMD experts, this study adapted the Axis I of the DC/TMD for use in evaluating TMD in children and adolescents.Item Open Access Neuroanesthesia Guidelines for Optimizing Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Neuromonitoring During Deformity and Complex Spinal Surgery: A Delphi Consensus Study.(Spine, 2020-07) Walker, Corey T; Kim, Han Jo; Park, Paul; Lenke, Lawrence G; Weller, Mark A; Smith, Justin S; Nemergut, Edward C; Sciubba, Daniel M; Wang, Michael Y; Shaffrey, Christopher; Deviren, Vedat; Mummaneni, Praveen V; Chang, Joyce M; Mummaneni, Valli P; Than, Khoi D; Berjano, Pedro; Eastlack, Robert K; Mundis, Gregory M; Kanter, Adam S; Okonkwo, David O; Shin, John H; Lewis, Jason M; Koski, Tyler; Hoh, Daniel J; Glassman, Steven D; Vinci, Susan B; Daniels, Alan H; Clavijo, Claudia F; Turner, Jay D; McLawhorn, Marc; Uribe, Juan SStudy design
Expert opinion-modified Delphi study.Objective
We used a modified Delphi approach to obtain consensus among leading spinal deformity surgeons and their neuroanesthesiology teams regarding optimal practices for obtaining reliable motor evoked potential (MEP) signals.Summary of background data
Intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring of transcranial MEPs provides the best method for assessing spinal cord integrity during complex spinal surgeries. MEPs are affected by pharmacological and physiological parameters. It is the responsibility of the spine surgeon and neuroanesthesia team to understand how they can best maintain high-quality MEP signals throughout surgery. Nevertheless, varying approaches to neuroanesthesia are seen in clinical practice.Methods
We identified 19 international expert spinal deformity treatment teams. A modified Delphi process with two rounds of surveying was performed. Greater than 50% agreement on the final statements was considered "agreement"; >75% agreement was considered "consensus."Results
Anesthesia regimens and protocols were obtained from the expert centers. There was a large amount of variability among centers. Two rounds of consensus surveying were performed, and all centers participated in both rounds of surveying. Consensus was obtained for 12 of 15 statements, and majority agreement was obtained for two of the remaining statements. Total intravenous anesthesia was identified as the preferred method of maintenance, with few centers allowing for low mean alveolar concentration of inhaled anesthetic. Most centers advocated for <150 μg/kg/min of propofol with titration to the lowest dose that maintains appropriate anesthesia depth based on awareness monitoring. Use of adjuvant intravenous anesthetics, including ketamine, low-dose dexmedetomidine, and lidocaine, may help to reduce propofol requirements without negatively effecting MEP signals.Conclusion
Spine surgeons and neuroanesthesia teams should be familiar with methods for optimizing MEPs during deformity and complex spinal cases. Although variability in practices exists, there is consensus among international spinal deformity treatment centers regarding best practices.Level of evidence
5.Item Open Access Optimal surgical care for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: an international consensus.(European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2014-12) de Kleuver, Marinus; Lewis, Stephen J; Germscheid, Niccole M; Kamper, Steven J; Alanay, Ahmet; Berven, Sigurd H; Cheung, Kenneth M; Ito, Manabu; Lenke, Lawrence G; Polly, David W; Qiu, Yong; van Tulder, Maurits; Shaffrey, ChristopherPurpose
The surgical management of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) has seen many developments in the last two decades. Little high-level evidence is available to support these changes and guide treatment. This study aimed to identify optimal operative care for adolescents with AIS curves between 40° and 90° Cobb angle.Methods
From July 2012 to April 2013, the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Deformity performed a modified Delphi survey where current expert opinion from 48 experienced deformity surgeons, representing 29 diverse countries, was gathered. Four rounds were performed: three web-based surveys and a final face-to-face meeting. Consensus was achieved with ≥ 70% agreement. Data were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively.Results
Consensus of what constitutes optimal care was reached on greater than 60 aspects including: preoperative radiographs; posterior as opposed to anterior (endoscopic) surgical approaches; use of intraoperative spinal cord monitoring; use of local autologous bone (not iliac crest) for grafts; use of thoracic and lumbar pedicle screws; use of titanium anchor points; implant density of <80% for 40°-70° curves; and aspects of postoperative care. Variability in practice patterns was found where there was no consensus. In addition, there was consensus on what does not constitute optimal care, including: routine pre- and intraoperative traction; routine anterior release; use of bone morphogenetic proteins; and routine postoperative CT scanning.Conclusions
International consensus was found on many aspects of what does and does not constitute optimal operative care for adolescents with AIS. In the absence of current high-level evidence, at present, these expert opinion findings will aid health care providers worldwide define appropriate care in their regions. Areas with no consensus provide excellent insight and priorities for future research.Item Open Access Reliability assessment of a novel cervical spine deformity classification system.(Journal of neurosurgery. Spine, 2015-12) Ames, Christopher P; Smith, Justin S; Eastlack, Robert; Blaskiewicz, Donald J; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Schwab, Frank; Bess, Shay; Kim, Han Jo; Mundis, Gregory M; Klineberg, Eric; Gupta, Munish; O'Brien, Michael; Hostin, Richard; Scheer, Justin K; Protopsaltis, Themistocles S; Fu, Kai-Ming G; Hart, Robert; Albert, Todd J; Riew, K Daniel; Fehlings, Michael G; Deviren, Vedat; Lafage, Virginie; International Spine Study GroupObject
Despite the complexity of cervical spine deformity (CSD) and its significant impact on patient quality of life, there exists no comprehensive classification system. The objective of this study was to develop a novel classification system based on a modified Delphi approach and to characterize the intra- and interobserver reliability of this classification.Methods
Based on an extensive literature review and a modified Delphi approach with an expert panel, a CSD classification system was generated. The classification system included a deformity descriptor and 5 modifiers that incorporated sagittal, regional, and global spinopelvic alignment and neurological status. The descriptors included: "C," "CT," and "T" for primary cervical kyphotic deformities with an apex in the cervical spine, cervicothoracic junction, or thoracic spine, respectively; "S" for primary coronal deformity with a coronal Cobb angle ≥ 15°; and "CVJ" for primary craniovertebral junction deformity. The modifiers included C2-7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), horizontal gaze (chin-brow to vertical angle [CBVA]), T1 slope (TS) minus C2-7 lordosis (TS-CL), myelopathy (modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association [mJOA] scale score), and the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-Schwab classification for thoracolumbar deformity. Application of the classification system requires the following: 1) full-length standing posteroanterior (PA) and lateral spine radiographs that include the cervical spine and femoral heads; 2) standing PA and lateral cervical spine radiographs; 3) completed and scored mJOA questionnaire; and 4) a clinical photograph or radiograph that includes the skull for measurement of the CBVA. A series of 10 CSD cases, broadly representative of the classification system, were selected and sufficient radiographic and clinical history to enable classification were assembled. A panel of spinal deformity surgeons was queried to classify each case twice, with a minimum of 1 intervening week. Inter- and intrarater reliability measures were based on calculations of Fleiss k coefficient values.Results
Twenty spinal deformity surgeons participated in this study. Interrater reliability (Fleiss k coefficients) for the deformity descriptor rounds 1 and 2 were 0.489 and 0.280, respectively, and mean intrarater reliability was 0.584. For the modifiers, including the SRS-Schwab components, the interrater (round 1/round 2) and intrarater reliabilities (Fleiss k coefficients) were: C2-7 SVA (0.338/0.412, 0.584), horizontal gaze (0.779/0.430, 0.768), TS-CL (0.721/0.567, 0.720), myelopathy (0.602/0.477, 0.746), SRS-Schwab curve type (0.590/0.433, 0.564), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (0.554/0.386, 0.826), pelvic tilt (0.714/0.627, 0.633), and C7-S1 SVA (0.071/0.064, 0.233), respectively. The parameter with the poorest reliability was the C7-S1 SVA, which may have resulted from differences in interpretation of positive and negative measurements.Conclusions
The proposed classification provides a mechanism to assess CSD within the framework of global spinopelvic malalignment and clinically relevant parameters. The intra- and interobserver reliabilities suggest moderate agreement and serve as the basis for subsequent improvement and study of the proposed classification.Item Open Access Therapeutic decision making in thoracolumbar spine trauma.(Spine, 2010-10) Oner, F Cumhur; Wood, Kirkham B; Smith, Justin S; Shaffrey, Christopher IStudy design
Systematic literature review.Objective
A systematic review was designed to answer 3 primary research questions: (1) What is the most useful classification system for surgical and nonsurgical decision-making with regard to thoracolumbar (TL) spine injuries? (2) For a TL burst fracture with incomplete neurologic deficit, what is the optimal surgical approach and stabilization technique? (3) Is complete disruption of the posterior ligamentous complex an indication for surgical intervention for TL burst fractures?Summary of background data
Despite a long history of descriptive and clinical series, there remains considerable controversy and wide variation in the treatment of traumatic TL spine injuries.Methods
A comprehensive search of the English literature was conducted using Medline and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Standardized grading systems were used to assess the level of evidence and quality of articles impacting the research questions.Results
Recommendations for the primary research questions were as follows: (1) Thoracolumbar Injury Classification System seems to be the best system available for therapeutic decision-making for TL spine injuries (strength of recommendation: weak; quality of evidence: low). (2) There is no specific surgical approach in the case of a TL burst fracture with incomplete neurologic deficit that has any advantage with regard to neurologic recovery (strength of recommendation: weak; quality of evidence: low). (3) Complete disruption of the posterior ligamentous complex as determined collectively by morphologic criteria using plain radiographs and computed tomography is an indication for surgical intervention in TL burst fractures (strength of recommendation: strong; quality of evidence: low).Conclusion
Based on this systematic review of the literature only very low to moderate quality studies could be identified to address clinical questions related to TL spine trauma. These findings suggest the need for further study, including emphasis on higher quality studies.Item Open Access What does it mean to be affiliated with care?: Delphi consensus on the definition of "unaffiliation" and "specialist" in sickle cell disease.(PloS one, 2022-01) Lamont, Andrea E; Hsu, Lewis L; Jacobs, Sara; Gibson, Robert; Treadwell, Marsha; Chen, Yumei; Lottenberg, Richard; Axelrod, Kathleen; Varughese, Taniya; Melvin, Cathy; Smith, Sharon; Chukwudozie, Ifeanyi Beverly; Kanter, Julie; Sickle Cell Disease Implementation ConsortiumAccruing evidence reveals best practices for how to help individuals living with Sickle Cell Disease (SCD); yet, the implementation of these evidence-based practices in healthcare settings is lacking. The Sickle Cell Disease Implementation Consortium (SCDIC) is a national consortium that uses implementation science to identify and address barriers to care in SCD. The SCDIC seeks to understand how and why patients become unaffiliated from care and determine strategies to identify and connect patients to care. A challenge, however, is the lack of agreed-upon definition for what it means to be unaffiliated and what it means to be a "SCD expert provider". In this study, we conducted a Delphi process to obtain expert consensus on what it means to be an "unaffiliated patient" with SCD and to define an "SCD specialist," as no standard definition is available. Twenty-eight SCD experts participated in three rounds of questions. Consensus was defined as 80% or more of respondents agreeing. Experts reached consensus that an individual with SCD who is unaffiliated from care is "someone who has not been seen by a sickle cell specialist in at least a year." A sickle cell specialist was defined as someone with knowledge and experience in SCD. Having "knowledge" means: being knowledgeable of the 2014 NIH Guidelines, "Evidence-Based Management of SCD", trained in hydroxyurea management and transfusions, trained on screening for organ damage in SCD, trained in pain management and on SCD emergencies, and is aware of psychosocial and cognitive issues in SCD. Experiences that are expected of a SCD specialist include experience working with SCD patients, mentored by a SCD specialist, regular attendance at SCD conferences, and obtains continuing medical education on SCD every 2 years." The results have strong implications for future research, practice, and policy related to SCD by helping to lay a foundation for an new area of research (e.g., to identify subpopulations of unaffiliation and targeted interventions) and policies that support reaffiliation and increase accessibility to quality care.