Consensus-Based Guidelines for Communicating a Misdiagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis to Reduce Psychological Distress

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS ACS Applied Bio Materials Pub Date : 2024-10-28 DOI:10.1002/brb3.70109
Angela Lesley Baufeldt, Nikos Evangelou, Nima Moghaddam, Mark Gresswell, Roshan das Nair
{"title":"Consensus-Based Guidelines for Communicating a Misdiagnosis of Multiple Sclerosis to Reduce Psychological Distress","authors":"Angela Lesley Baufeldt,&nbsp;Nikos Evangelou,&nbsp;Nima Moghaddam,&nbsp;Mark Gresswell,&nbsp;Roshan das Nair","doi":"10.1002/brb3.70109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Multiple sclerosis (MS) misdiagnosis is common, and when discovered, frequently leads to substantial disruption to patients’ lives and anxiety for clinicians. Our objective was to develop expert consensus-based guidelines about how to communicate a misdiagnosis of MS to a patient, to reduce the potential for both psychological distress and litigation.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A modified Delphi method using a systematic literature review on doctor and patient experiences of the MS diagnosis communication was used to populate items for a first-round questionnaire. Our Delphi panel represented three perspectives (clinicians, people with MS, and published experts in health communication), and we recruited 18 panelists in total (6 per perspective). Consensus was defined a priori as 75% of panelists giving an item the same rating. A feedback round was undertaken with six external reviewers, naïve to the guideline development process, and the panelists. Items were reviewed by the study team and synthesized to create the finalized guidelines.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Consensus was reached for 45 items rated as “very important” and presented in the feedback round. The study team synthesized the 45 items to 27 items. Ten items related specifically to the communication of the MS misdiagnosis and 17 items to generic guidelines highlighted as important in the MS misdiagnosis appointment. Seven recommendations form the guidelines presented here.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Seven consensus-based recommendations offer guidance to practising neurologists in their communication with patients in a situation that has the potential to be highly distressing, for both clinician and patient.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/brb3.70109","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/brb3.70109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Multiple sclerosis (MS) misdiagnosis is common, and when discovered, frequently leads to substantial disruption to patients’ lives and anxiety for clinicians. Our objective was to develop expert consensus-based guidelines about how to communicate a misdiagnosis of MS to a patient, to reduce the potential for both psychological distress and litigation.

Methods

A modified Delphi method using a systematic literature review on doctor and patient experiences of the MS diagnosis communication was used to populate items for a first-round questionnaire. Our Delphi panel represented three perspectives (clinicians, people with MS, and published experts in health communication), and we recruited 18 panelists in total (6 per perspective). Consensus was defined a priori as 75% of panelists giving an item the same rating. A feedback round was undertaken with six external reviewers, naïve to the guideline development process, and the panelists. Items were reviewed by the study team and synthesized to create the finalized guidelines.

Results

Consensus was reached for 45 items rated as “very important” and presented in the feedback round. The study team synthesized the 45 items to 27 items. Ten items related specifically to the communication of the MS misdiagnosis and 17 items to generic guidelines highlighted as important in the MS misdiagnosis appointment. Seven recommendations form the guidelines presented here.

Conclusions

Seven consensus-based recommendations offer guidance to practising neurologists in their communication with patients in a situation that has the potential to be highly distressing, for both clinician and patient.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于共识的多发性硬化症误诊沟通指南,以减少心理压力。
背景:多发性硬化症(MS)误诊很常见,一旦被发现,往往会对患者的生活造成严重影响,并使临床医生感到焦虑。我们的目标是就如何向患者传达多发性硬化症误诊信息制定基于专家共识的指南,以减少潜在的心理困扰和诉讼:方法:我们采用了经过修改的德尔菲法,通过对医生和患者在多发性硬化症诊断沟通方面的经验进行系统的文献综述,为第一轮调查问卷填充项目。我们的德尔菲小组代表了三种视角(临床医生、多发性硬化症患者和公开发表的健康交流专家),共招募了 18 名小组成员(每种视角 6 人)。达成共识的先验定义是 75% 的小组成员对某一项目给予相同的评分。由六位对指南制定过程不熟悉的外部评审员和专家组成员进行了一轮反馈。研究小组对项目进行了审查和综合,最终确定了指南:结果:45 个被评为 "非常重要 "的项目达成了共识,并在一轮反馈中提出。研究小组将这 45 个项目综合为 27 个项目。其中 10 个项目专门涉及多发性硬化症误诊的沟通,17 个项目涉及在多发性硬化症误诊预约中被强调为重要的通用指南。七项建议构成了本文介绍的指南:七项基于共识的建议为神经科执业医师在与患者沟通时提供了指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
期刊最新文献
A Systematic Review of Sleep Disturbance in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension. Advancing Patient Education in Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension: The Promise of Large Language Models. Anti-Myelin-Associated Glycoprotein Neuropathy: Recent Developments. Approach to Managing the Initial Presentation of Multiple Sclerosis: A Worldwide Practice Survey. Association Between LACE+ Index Risk Category and 90-Day Mortality After Stroke.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1