Search

Objective: While approaches for utilizing student course evaluations (SCEs) have been discussed in the literature, there remain opportunities to identify ideal practices for SCEs. Thus, the objective of this project was to generate consensus on best practices in creating, administering, and using SCEs., Methods: A modified Delphi approach was utilized to generate a set of items based on the literature and prior work. Experts were identified from different roles, institution types, and geographic regions to participate in the panel. Consensus-building rounds were performed until no new ideas were introduced using an electronic survey platform. Data were analyzed descriptively in each round., Results: After the second round, 47 items met consensus. Key recommendations included enhanced training of students to provide feedback, transparency with students on how feedback is utilized, using SCEs as one element of data sources, and the importance of ensuring intentional approaches based on theoretical constructs used in the field of course evaluation., Conclusion: This Delphi study established consensus on approaches programs can use to optimize SCEs, according to experts from across the academy. Though some items are very specific, there are opportunities for individualization based on program priorities., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None declared., (Copyright © 2024 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a rare, chronic, heterogeneous, and potentially life-threatening disease characterized by primary, sterile, and macroscopically visible pustules with or without systemic symptoms. There are ethnic differences in the genetic mutations associated with GPP that might affect the clinical manifestations and treatment responses. Currently, there is limited evidence from the patient population in the Asia-Pacific (APAC) region, resulting in a general paucity of information on the effective management of patients with GPP in this region. This modified Delphi panel study aimed to identify current evidence and gain advanced insights to facilitate the development of a regionally tailored APAC consensus on the management of GPP. A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to identify published literature and develop consensus statements on (i) definition and clinical course, (ii) diagnosis of GPP, (iii) treatment outcomes, goals, and monitoring measures, and (iv) optimal management strategies and clinical practices. Statements were rated by a panel of dermatologists in two rounds, with the threshold for consensus at ≥80% agreement. Twenty experts from the APAC region reached consensus on 106 statements that were developed based on the SLR and experts' collective expertise. The experts agreed that GPP is a rare, severe, and potentially life-threatening condition that is distinct from plaque psoriasis. This consensus emphasized the importance of a tailored treatment strategy taking into account the GPP flare severity and each patient's unique clinical circumstances. The experts reached consensus on the severity classification of GPP flares and recommended first-line and maintenance treatment options for adult GPP, childhood GPP, and GPP in pregnancy. These consensus outcomes have been synthesized into treatment algorithms to guide dermatologists in the APAC region in their clinical decision-making processes., (© 2024 The Author(s). The Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Dermatological Association.)

Background: The 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines recommended a shift from a traditional hierarchical treatment for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) to a four-pillar medical therapy strategy intended for near-simultaneous initiation. However, practical guidance for implementation in clinical practice is lacking. To address this, a Delphi Panel of 12 Belgian heart failure experts aimed to obtain consensus on integrating guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in HFrEF patients in Belgian clinical practice, considering local specificities, including reimbursement criteria., Methods: A geographically representative sample of 12 Belgian cardiologists engaged in a three-round Delphi process, evolving from 20 open-ended questions to 39 statements. A qualitative analysis after the first round resulted in expert statements for the subsequent questionnaire, categorised into treatment for newly diagnosed and chronic HFrEF patients., Results: The Delphi consensus revealed four key findings: (i) Agreement on initiating the four medical cornerstones within 7-14 days of HFrEF diagnosis, prioritising initiation over individual class up-titration; (ii) Lack of consensus on a fixed sequence for initiation due to patient variability and national reimbursement criteria; (iii) Emphasis on treatment adjustment based on the patient's clinical presentation and comorbidities; (iv) Recognition of the crucial role of regular follow-up visits, allowing optimisation of medical therapy where appropriate., Conclusion: This national Delphi consensus addresses clinical implementation of GDMT in HFrEF patients for Belgian cardiologists. The consensus highlights the importance of swift implementation of the four cornerstone medical therapies in newly diagnosed HFrEF patients, individualising treatment sequencing, and ensuring regular follow-up to optimise therapy.

Objectives: A recent applicability study highlighted the need for the existing checklist for reporting research using a simulated patient methodology (CRiSP) to be clearer and user-friendly. The aim of this study was to update the checklist to address these concerns., Methods: A fourth round of the Delphi consensus study, used in the original checklist development work, was conducted. Previous participants, who had expertise in SP methodology, were invited to complete a questionnaire including a list of 13 checklist items developed in the previous study and revised following applicability testing. Closed questions were analysed for frequency. Consensus was predefined as >80% agreement. All items were discussed in a roundtable meeting and further modified as necessary. Responses to open questions were content analysed., Key Findings: Twenty-one authors participated. There was a statistical consensus in 12 out of 13 modified checklist items., Conclusions: A final reporting checklist for studies in health research using SP methodology has been developed using a consensus approach. Further refinements may be needed to increase the generalizability of the checklist in different contexts., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society.)

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., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

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., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

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., (© 2024 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

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.

Introduction: Automated self-scheduling may benefit healthcare organizations, yet uptake has been slow. The aim of this study was to develop a consensus statement regarding the organizational-level determinants of implementation success based on the collective knowledge of experts. A three-stage modified Delphi method was used to reach consensus on the top determinants of implementation of self-scheduling solutions by healthcare organizations. A panel of 53 experts representing 41 academic health systems identified barriers and facilitators involving the organization's inner and outing settings, as well as the characteristics of the intervention and the individuals engaged in the solution. Offering convenience for patients is the leading enabler for organizations to implement the technology. The consensus may aid healthcare organizations and suppliers engaged in adopting and developing self-scheduling technology to improve implementation success. Further research is recommended to diagnose and examine each barrier and facilitator and how these factors interact., Objective: The aim of this study was to develop a consensus statement regarding the determinants of implementation success based on the collective knowledge of experts working in the field., Methods: A Delphi panel was constructed based on selected participants employed by academic health systems and experienced with self-scheduling implementation. Panelists were recruited based on participation in an educational event that featured the topic. Purposive and snowball sampling were used. Panelists participated in surveys collected over three rounds. An 80 percent agreement among panelists and interquartile range (IQR) <1 determined the barriers and facilitators. The top-10 determinants were presented in rank order., Results: Between January 6, 2021, and May 26, 2021, 53 panelists representing 41 academic health systems participated in three rounds of surveys to reach consensus on the barriers and facilitators to implementation of self-scheduling by healthcare organizations in the United States. In round one, panelists documented 530 determinants. In round two, the determinants were grouped into 72 barriers and 85 facilitators, each of which participants rated on a five-point Likert scale. Fifteen determinants met the 80 percent threshold and 1.0 IQR. The final round concluded with a top-10, rank-ordered listing of determinants (seven facilitators and three barriers) that also incorporated a median rating score using five-point Likert scale., Conclusion: A three-stage modified Delphi method was used to reach consensus on the top determinants of implementation of self-scheduling solutions by academic health systems. The consensus may aid healthcare organizations and suppliers engaged in adopting and developing self-scheduling technology to improve implementation success. Further research is recommended to diagnose and examine each barrier and facilitator and how these factors interact., (Copyright © 2022 by the American Health Information Management Association.)