Search

Abstract 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.

Abstract Introduction Existing approaches in cancer survivorship care delivery have proven to be insufficient to engage primary care. This study aimed to identify stakeholder‐informed priorities to improve primary care engagement in breast cancer survivorship care. Methods Experts in U.S. cancer survivorship care delivery were invited to participate in a 4‐round online Delphi panel to identify and evaluate priorities for defining and fostering primary care's engagement in breast cancer survivorship. Panelists were asked to identify and then assess (ratings of 1–9) the importance and feasibility of priority items to support primary care engagement in survivorship. Panelists were asked to review the group results and reevaluate the importance and feasibility of each item, aiming to reach consensus. Results Respondent panelists (n = 23, response rate 57.5%) identified 31 priority items to support survivorship care. Panelists consistently rated three items most important (scored 9) but with uncertain feasibility (scored 5–6). These items emphasized the need to foster connections and improve communication between primary care and oncology. Panelists reached consensus on four items evaluated as important and feasible: (1) educating patients on survivorship, (2) enabling screening reminders and monitoring alerts in the electronic medical record, (3) identifying patient resources for clinicians to recommend, and (4) distributing accessible reference guides of common breast cancer drugs. Conclusion Role clarity and communication between oncology and primary care were rated as most important; however, uncertainty about feasibility remains. These findings indicate that cross‐disciplinary capacity building to address feasibility issues may be needed to make the most important priority items actionable in primary care.

Abstract Background Fabry disease is a rare, X-linked inherited lysosomal storage disorder, that manifests as a heterogeneous disease with renal, cardiac and nervous system involvement. The most common pain experienced by people with Fabry disease are episodes of neuropathic pain reported in up to 80% of classical hemizygous male patients and up to 65% of heterozygous female patients. No clear consensus exists within UK clinical practice for the assessment and management of pain in Fabry disease based on agreed clinical practice and clinical experience. Here we describe a modified Delphi initiative to establish expert consensus on management of pain in Fabry disease in the UK clinical setting. Methods Delphi panel members were identified based on their demonstrated expertise in managing adult or paediatric patients with Fabry disease in the UK and recruited by an independent third-party administrator. Ten expert panellists agreed to participate in two survey rounds, during which they remained anonymous to each other. Circulation of the questionnaires, and collection and processing of the panel’s responses were conducted between September 2021 and December 2021. All questions required an answer. Results The Delphi panel reached a consensus on 21 out of 41 aspects of pain assessment and management of pain in Fabry disease. These encompassed steps in the care pathway from the goals of therapy through to holistic support, including the use of gabapentin and carbamazepine as first-line analgesic medications for the treatment of neuropathic pain in Fabry disease, as well as the proactive management of symptoms of anxiety and/or depression associated with Fabry pain. Conclusions The consensus panel outcomes reported here have highlighted strengths in current UK clinical practice, along with unmet needs for further research and agreement. This consensus is intended to prompt the next steps towards developing clinical guidelines.

Background: There is currently no standardised definition for patients at high risk of recurrence of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative early breast cancer (eBC; stages 1–3) after surgery. This modified Delphi panel aimed to establish expert UK consensus on this definition, separately considering hormone receptor (HR)-positive and triple-negative (TN) patients. Methods: Over three consecutive rounds, results were collected from 29, 24 and 22 UK senior breast cancer oncologists and surgeons, respectively. The first round aimed to determine key risk factors in each patient subgroup; subsequent rounds aimed to establish appropriate risk thresholds. Consensus was pre-defined as ≥70% of respondents. Results: Expert consensus was achieved on need to assess age, tumour size, tumour grade, number of positive lymph nodes, inflammatory breast cancer and risk prediction tools in all HER2-negative patients. There was additional agreement on use of tumour profiling tests and biomarkers in HR-positive patients, and pathologic complete response (pCR) status in TN patients. Thresholds for high recurrence risk were subsequently agreed. In HR-positive patients, these included age 5 cm (as independent risk factors); tumour grade 3 (independently and combined with other high-risk factors); number of positive nodes ≥4 (independently) and ≥1 (combined). For TN patients, the following thresholds reached consensus, both independently and in combination with other factors: tumour size >2 cm, tumour grade 3, number of positive nodes ≥1. Conclusions: The results may be a valuable reference point to guide recurrence risk assessment and decision-making after surgery in the HER2-negative eBC population.

IntroductionPain in multiple sclerosis (MS) is common, but literature on pain in children with MS remains scarce. Pain has physical, psychological, and social implications in MS, and both comprehensive assessment and interdisciplinary management approaches are needed. We sought to develop an interdisciplinary interim guideline for the assessment and management of pain in children with MS.Methods and materialsWe convened a modified Delphi panel composed of 13 experts in pediatric and adult MS neurology, physiotherapy, pain, patient lived-experience, advanced practice nursing, psychology, physiatry, and MS research. A survey was sent to panelists for anonymous completion. The panel discussed survey themes extracted by the panel chair. The process was repeated twice.ResultsThirteen assessment and treatment recommendations were produced regarding pain in children with MS.DiscussionFuture studies will assess implementation of these pain assessment and treatment guidelines in the clinical setting.

IntroductionAdvanced urothelial carcinoma remains aggressive and very hard to cure, while new treatments will pose a challenge for clinicians and healthcare funding policymakers alike. The U-CHANGE Project aimed to redesign the current model of care for advanced urothelial carcinoma patients to identify limitations (“as is” scenario) and recommend future actions (“to be” scenario).MethodsTwenty-three subject-matter experts, divided into three groups, analyzed the two scenarios as part of a multidimensional consensus process, developing statements for specific domains of the disease, and a simplified Delphi methodology was used to establish consensus among the experts.ResultsRecommended actions included increasing awareness of the disease, increased training of healthcare professionals, improvement of screening strategies and care pathways, increased support for patients and caregivers and relevant recommendations from molecular tumor boards when comprehensive genomic profiling has to be provided for appropriate patient selection to ad hoc targeted therapies.DiscussionWhile the innovative new targeted agents have the potential to significantly alter the clinical approach to this highly aggressive disease, the U-CHANGE Project experience shows that the use of these new agents will require a radical shift in the entire model of care, implementing sustainable changes which anticipate the benefits of future treatments, capable of targeting the right patient with the right agent at different stages of the disease.

BackgroundAchondroplasia is a rare genetic disorder caused by a mutation in the FGFR3 gene, leading to skeletal changes and other systemic complications that greatly impact the patient's quality of life. There currently are differences in achondroplasia patients' management among countries and centers within the same country.MethodA group of Italian experts discussed the best practice and the current unmet needs in the management of patients with achondroplasia though a two-round Delphi panel, between September and November 2022. The Delphi survey consisted of 32 questions covering organizational aspects, diagnosis and follow-up, and management of achondroplasia patient, and was shared among 54 experts from 25 different centers in Italy. The consensus was determined on the basis of the percentage of agreement or disagreement to each statement on a 5-point Likert scale.ResultsPediatricians (including specialists in pediatrics, medical genetics, and pediatric endocrinology) orthopedics and medical geneticists were the most represented specialists accounting for 64%, 9% and 9% of participants, respectively. The panel highlighted the need for standardized procedures to identify reference centers, the crucial role of multidisciplinary team, and effective communication among centers (Hub and Spoke model) as the essential organizational features; the importance of genetic counseling, presence of a psychologist, and clear communication during prenatal diagnosis as main points for diagnosis; early intervention by different specialists, personalized care, and promotion of a healthy lifestyle as major points for patient management.ConclusionTo ensure an adequate continuity of care over the whole lifespan of a patient with achondroplasia a shared model for patient management is suggested by Italian specialists.

Michael S Broder, Sarah N Gibbs, Irina Yermilov Outcomes Research, Partnership for Health Analytic Research (PHAR), LLC, Beverly Hills, CA, USACorrespondence: Michael S Broder, Partnership for Health Analytic Research (PHAR), LLC, 280 S Beverly Drive, Suite 404, Beverly Hills, CA, 90212, USA, Tel +1-310-858-9555, Fax +1-310-858-9550, Email mbroder@pharllc.comAbstract: The RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel method is a formal group consensus process that systematically and quantitatively combines expert opinion and evidence by asking panelists to rate, discuss, then re-rate items. The method has been used to develop medical society guidelines, other clinical practice guidelines, disease classification systems, research agendas, and quality improvement interventions. Traditionally, a group of experts meet in person to discuss results of a first-round survey. After the meeting, experts complete a second-round survey used to develop areas of consensus. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this aspect of the method was not possible. As such, we have adapted the method to conduct virtual RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panels. In this study, we present a targeted literature review to describe and summarize the existing evidence on the RAND/UCLA modified Delphi panel method and outline our adaptation for conducting these panels virtually. Transitioning from in-person to virtual meetings was not without challenges, but there have also been unexpected advantages. The method we describe here can be a cost-effective and efficient alternative for researchers and clinicians.Keywords: Delphi panel, expert panel, consensus, virtual meeting, COVID-19, pandemic

Limited guidance exists to support investigators in the choice, adaptation, validation and use of implementation measures for global mental health implementation research. Our objectives were to develop consensus on best practices for implementation measurement and identify strengths and opportunities in current practice. We convened seven expert panelists. Participants rated approaches to measure adaptation and validation according to appropriateness and feasibility. Follow-up interviews were conducted and a group discussion was held. We then surveyed investigators who have used quantitative implementation measures in global mental health implementation research. Participants described their use of implementation measures, including approaches to adaptation and validation, alongside challenges and opportunities. Panelists agreed that investigators could rely on evidence of a measure’s validity, reliability and dimensionality from similar contexts. Panelists did not reach consensus on whether to establish the pragmatic qualities of measures in novel settings. Survey respondents (n = 28) most commonly reported using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research Inner Setting Measures (n = 9) and the Program Assessment Sustainability Tool (n = 5). All reported adapting measures to their settings; only two reported validating their measures. These results will support guidance for implementation measurement in support of mental health services in diverse global settings.

Abstract 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.

Introduction and objectives: We aimed to build a national consensus to optimize the use of oral corticosteroids (OCS) in severe asthma in Portugal. Material and methods: A modified 3-round Delphi including 65 statements (topics on chronic systemic corticotherapy, therapeutic schemes, asthma safety and monitoring) was performed via online platform (October-November 2019). A five-point Likert-type scale was used (1-‘strongly disagree’; 5-‘strongly agree’). Consensus threshold was established as a percentage of agreement among participants ≥90% in the 1st round and ≥85% in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. The level of consensus achieved by the panel was discussed with the participants (face-to-face meeting). Results: Forty-eight expert physicians in severe asthma (specialists in allergology and pulmonology) participated in the study. Almost half of the statements (28/65; 43.1%) obtained positive consensus by the end of round one. By the end of the exercise, 12 (18.5%) statements did not achieve consensus. Overall, 87% of physicians agree that further actions for OCS cumulative risk assessment in acute asthma exacerbations are needed. The vast majority (91.7%) demonstrated a favorable perception for using biological agents whenever patients are eligible. Most participants (95.8%) are more willing to accept some degree of lung function deterioration compared to other outcomes (worsening of symptoms, quality of life) when reducing OCS dose. Monitoring patients’ comorbidities was rated as imperative by all experts. Conclusions: : These results can guide an update on asthma management in Portugal and should be supplemented by studies on therapy access, patients’ adherence, and costs.

BackgroundThe high incidence of post-stroke depression (PSD) during rehabilitation exerts a negative effect on the treatment and functional recovery of patients with stroke and increases the risk of mortality. It is necessary to screen PSD in the rehabilitation stage and thus provide effective intervention strategies. However, existing measurements used to assess PSD in the rehabilitation stage in patients with stroke lack specificity. This study aimed to develop a clinical measure to assess symptoms of PSD in the rehabilitation stage.MethodsThe research team created the initial items through a literature review and semi-structured interviews of patients with stroke. Then, the symptom-related items were estimated by three panels: healthcare professionals (N = 41), Delphi experts (N = 15), and patients with stroke in the rehabilitation stage (N = 30).ResultsThe literature review and semi-structured interview produced 51 symptom-related items including six domains, and the items were reduced to 47 by the healthcare professionals. The symptom-related items were further reduced to 33 items by a two-round Delphi consultation. The initiative coefficients of the two Delphi rounds were 71.4 and 100%, the expert authority coefficients were both 0.85, Kendall’s W were 0.152 and 0.408 (p < 0.01), and the coefficient of variation (CV) were 0.05–0.32 and 0.00–0.18, respectively. The item-level content validity index (I-CVI) was 0.53–1.00, the scale-level CVI/universal agreement (S-CVI/UA) was 0.26, and the S-CVI/average (S -CVI/Ave) was 0.85 for the first found Delphi consultation; the I-CVI was 0.67–1.00, the S-CVI/UA was 0.61, and the S-CVI/Ave was 0.97 for the second round Delphi consultation. All content validity indicators have been significantly improved compared with the first round. Using mean ≥ 4 and full score ≥ 0.5, combined with CV ≤ 0.16 as the item criteria, a clinical measure of PSD with 33 items and 6 dimensions (cognition, sleep, behavior, emotion, body, and guilt) was finally formed after two rounds. The patients with stroke made no further revisions after evaluation.ConclusionThe research team developed a specific tool with good content validity to assess the symptoms of PSD in the rehabilitation stage.

Although trust is one of the most widespread and studied constructs in marketing and management, its definition, versatility and different application areas may have fostered a certain dispersion when measuring this concept. Despite the increasing importance of blogs, specific scales for, and measures of, trust have not been considered in the literature. This paper proposes a scale to measure online trust in the blog domain (Blog Trust Scale, BTS) through the development of an international Delphi panel consisting of 14 experts from 5 different countries. As a result, we have developed a solid measurement instrument of online trust in blogs, composed of 12 items and tested in four different countries.

Abstract 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.

Introduction: The objective of this study was to understand the potential use of single agents and drug combinations in multiple myeloma (MM) across treatment lines in the years 2021 and 2023. Methods: The method used was Delphi Panel Method survey, administered to European Myeloma Network (EMN) Italy Working Group centres. Future treatments were identified assessing all available web-based information sources, including therapies (single drugs or combinations) with strong evidence of efficacy, likely to be on the Italian market in 2021 and 2023. Participants were asked to report on the likelihood of prescription for MM therapies, across treatment lines. Results: Across the 15 centres taking part in the survey, about 890 patients per year are forecasted to receive a new diagnosis of MM. In 2021, the Panel forecasted 66% of 1L-TE (transplant eligible) patients will be treated with bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) and 32% of patients with daratumumab-bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (DVTd), with a substantial decrease of VTD (15%) and a marked increase of DVTd (81%) forecasted for 2023. The 2L and 3L R(lenalidomide)-based combination treatments are expected to drop and will likely be substituted by a steep increase in P(pomalidomide)-based regimes (from 7% to 23%). On the contrary, in 3L treatment, all combination therapies (with the exception of IsaPd – isatuximab-pomalidomide-dexamethasone) are expected to lose market share in favour of the most recent new therapies. Conclusions: Expert Panel agrees that many different new drugs and combinations will be used in MM, with different mechanisms of action, both at diagnosis and in subsequent phases of the disease, with a corresponding decline of the drugs currently used.

Introduction−The maritime transport sector has been char-acterized by cooperative behaviour, through vertical and hori-zontal collaboration and integration, in which shipping com-panies are the main actors in the maritime concentration scenario. Choosing to develop a strategy of alliances that allow them to benefit from economies of scale and to extend their geographical coverage by planning and coordinating ships together on a global scale and thus offering a better service.Objective−The objective of this article is to elucidate possible strategies to be followed by shipping companies to continue on the path of growth and achieve greater stability in an envi-ronment characterized by changing and constantly evolving globalization. Methodology−The internal characteristics and the external situation (SWOT) are analyzed through a CAME analysis, based on the information obtained from a Delphi. Result−The strengths acquired by the shipping companies that make up the various alliances lead them to establish a defensive strategy (Strengths - Threats) - offensive (first quad-rant, Strengths - Opportunities) to maintain their supremacy in the sector. Conclusions− The cooperation and horizontal integration of the shipping companies has drawn a concentration scenario, in which the most important shipping companies (top 10) belong to one of the established alliances. As a result of this concentration, the shipping companies have greater negotiat-ing power, which allows them to mitigate the fluctuations in oil prices and take advantage of new market opportunities, such as new technologies applied to the tracking and han-dling of goods.

Abstract Background Academic Medical Centers (AMCs) must simultaneously serve different purposes: Delivery of high quality healthcare services to patients, as the main mission, supported by other core missions such as academic activities, i.e., researching, teaching and tutoring, while maintaining solvency. This study aims to develop a methodology for constructing models evaluating the academic value provided by AMCs and implementing it at the largest AMC in Israel. Methods Thirty five practiced educators and researchers, academic experts, faculty members and executives, all employed by a metropolitan 1500-bed AMC, were involved in developing academic quality indicators. First, an initial list of AMCs’ academic quality indicators was drafted, using a literature review and consulting scholars. Afterwards, additional data and preferences were collected by conducting semi-structured interviews, complemented by a three-round Delphi Panel. Finally, the methodology for constructing a model evaluating the academic value provided by the AMC was developed. Results The composite academic quality indicators methodology consists of nine indicators (relative weight in parentheses): ‘Scientific Publications Value’ (18.7%), ‘Completed Studies’ (13.5%), ‘Authors Value’ (13.0%), ‘Residents Quality’ (11.3%), ‘Competitive Grants Budget’ (10.2%), ‘Academic Training’ (8.7%), ‘Academic Positions’ (8.3%), ‘Number of Studies’ (8.3%) and ‘Academic Supervision’ (8.0%). These indicators were grouped into three core categories: ‘Education’, ‘Research’ and ‘Publications’, having almost the same importance on a scale from zero to one (0–1), i.e., 0.363, 0.320, and 0.317, respectively. The results demonstrated a high level of internal consistency (Cronbach-alpha range: 0.79–0.86). Conclusions We have found a gap in the ability to measure academic value provided by AMCs. The main contribution of this research is the development of methodology for constructing evaluation models for AMCs academic performance. Further studies are needed to further test the validity and reliability of the proposed methodology at other sites.

Abstract 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.

Jakob Vormstrup Holbech,1 Anne Jung,2 Torsten Jonsson,3 Mette Wanning,4 Claus Bredahl,5 Flemming W Bach6 1Department of Neurology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, 2Medicinsk Fælles Ambulatorium, Holbaek Hospital, 3Aleris-Hamlet Hospitaler Ringsted, 4The Private Pain Clinic, Herlev, 5Clinic Acute Orthopedic Surgical Anesthesia Section, Aalborg Universitetshospital, Aalborg, 6Department of Neurology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark Background: Current Danish treatment algorithms for pharmacological treatment of neuropathic pain (NeP) are tricyclic antidepressants (TCA), gabapentin and pregabalin as first-line treatment for the most common NeP conditions. Many patients have insufficient pain relief on monotherapy, but combination therapy had not been included in guidelines until recently. Based on clinical empiricism and scientific evidence, a Delphi consensus process provided a consolidated guidance on pharmacological combination treatment of NeP.Methods: A two-round virtual internet-based Delphi process with 6 Danish pain specialists was undertaken. In the first round, questions were answered individually and anonymously, whereas in the second round, the panel openly discussed first round’s summary of outcomes. Combinations of pharmacological pain treatments, that is, pregabalin/gabapentin, TCAs, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, opioids, other antiepileptics and cutaneous patches, were assessed based on both scientific and clinical practice experiences. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) grading system was used for evidence rating.Results: Combination of pregabalin/gabapentin with TCA is useful in patients who do not gain sufficient pain relief or tolerate either drug in high doses, or to improve sleep disturbance. Also, combination of pregabalin/gabapentin and SNRIs is reasonably well documented and experienced by some experts to result in sufficient pain relief and fewer side effects than monotherapy. Good evidence on efficacy was found for the combination of pregabalin/gabapentin or TCAs and opioids, which was also frequently used in clinical practice. The evidence for combining TCAs and SNRIs is insufficient, although sometimes used in clinical practice despite the risk of serotonin syndrome. For localized NeP, combination therapy with cutaneous patches should be considered. There was insufficient scientific evidence for any pharmacologic combination therapies with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors – as well as for other potential combinations.Conclusions: The study revealed that combination therapy is widely used in clinical practice and supported by some scientific evidence. However, further studies are needed. Keywords: neuropathic pain, combination therapy, Delphi panel, recommendations, CDC grading system, clinical practice

In the specific case of maritime transport, one of the most notable examples of digitalization is smart ports. Their positive impact on the supply chain is enabling processes to be optimized through smarter production. In the case of Spain, the Spanish public entity Puertos del Estado (Puertos del Estado is a public business entity dependent on the Spanish Ministry of Transport, Mobility and the Urban Agenda, with overall responsibility for the entire state-owned port system.) has launched Ports 4.0, the largest open innovation fund for the logistics-port ecosystem. It is therefore necessary to know the point of digitalization in which the Spanish ports are and the present scenario in which they develop their activity. For this purpose, a SWOT analysis (Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats analysis) is proposed, which is an ideal tool to make a reliable diagnosis of the port system in relation to a certain project before which we wish to make a strategic decision, in this case digitalization, in order to establish a concrete action plan in this regard. This should be the first step towards developing the Ports 4.0 project. The main conclusion of the analysis is that Spanish ports are currently at a medium high level of digitalization, and that they continue to update and innovate in order to be increasingly competitive in this market, despite the fact that there is still a long way to go in digitalization. The main challenge for Spanish ports is that technology alone is not useful enough to reach Ports 4.0 status; the technology also needs to be used in an integrated, open and joint way by all the agents of the port community, which is one of the main handicaps at present.

The assessment of risks in an audit work could directly influence the costs, timing, and strategies as well as audit quality. The purpose of this paper is to identify the critical affecting factors on risks proposed in Audit Risk Model (ARM), in Iranian audit environment of Iran. In the present, the Delphi Method consists of 60 audit partners and managers is employed. The panel consists of two equally divided groups, one from audit organization, a governmental organization, and the other from private audit firms. We employ two rounds of Delphi and 58 critical risk factors extracted from auditing literature and Iranian auditing standards and present them to the experts. There are 43 factors categorized as important factors to assess the risks in ARM. The results are considerable in an Iranian audit environment, findings show the most important factors are in inherent risk factors. Finally, we made a comparison with a similar study in Taiwan. Differences indicate that in professional judgment issues like risk assessment, the consideration of particular culture and environment could help enhance the precision of assessments, especially in assessing control risk factors.