Developing the Open Psychedelic Evaluation Nexus consensus measures for assessment of supervised psilocybin services: An e-Delphi study.

Background: Voter initiatives in Oregon and Colorado authorize legal frameworks for supervised psilocybin services, but no measures monitor safety or outcomes.
Aims: To develop core measures of best practices.
Methods: A three-phase e-Delphi process recruited 36 experts with 5 or more years' experience facilitating psilocybin experiences in various contexts (e.g., ceremonial settings, indigenous practices, clinical trials), or other pertinent psilocybin expertise. Phase I, an on-line survey with qualitative, open-ended text responses, generated potential measures to assess processes, outcomes, and structure reflecting high quality psilocybin services. In Phase II, experts used seven-point Likert scales to rate the importance and feasibility of the Phase I measures. Measures were priority ranked. Qualitative interviews and analysis in Phase III refined top-rated measures.
Results: Experts ( n  = 36; 53% female; 71% white; 56% heterosexual) reported currently providing psilocybin services (64%) for a mean of 15.2 [SD 13.1] years, experience with indigenous psychedelic practices (67%), and/or conducting clinical trials (36%). Thematic analysis of Phase I responses yielded 55 candidate process measures (e.g., preparatory hours with client, total dose of psilocybin administered, documentation of touch/sexual boundaries), outcome measures (e.g., adverse events, well-being, anxiety/depression symptoms), and structure measures (e.g., facilitator training in trauma informed care, referral capacity for medical/psychiatric issues). In Phase II and III, experts prioritized a core set of 11 process, 11 outcome, and 17 structure measures that balanced importance and feasibility.
Conclusion: Service providers and policy makers should consider standardizing core measures developed in this study to monitor the safety, quality, and outcomes of community-based psilocybin services.
Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.