运用德尔菲技术达成中国预防和治疗早产单胎的共识

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Maternal-Fetal Medicine Pub Date : 2023-10-01 DOI:10.1097/fm9.0000000000000201
Taishun Li, Zhe Liu, Huixia Yang, Yali Hu
{"title":"运用德尔菲技术达成中国预防和治疗早产单胎的共识","authors":"Taishun Li, Zhe Liu, Huixia Yang, Yali Hu","doi":"10.1097/fm9.0000000000000201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective This study aimed to reach a consensus among obstetric experts on the prevention and treatment of preterm single births in China. Methods Based on the scoping literature review and the 2014 edition of preterm birth of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment guidelines, we generated the Delphi survey statements with five evaluation dimensions, including the definition of preterm birth, exclusion of risk factors for preterm birth, prevention, and prediction of preterm birth, treatment of preterm birth, and evaluation of intervention outcomes of preterm birth. Obstetric experts from the Obstetrics and Gynecology Branch of the Chinese Medical Association formed the expert group for this survey. All the obstetric experts participated two-round modified Delphi survey via an anonymous online survey and an online panel. Mean scores, rank sum, full score ratio, and the lowest score ratio were calculated to reflect the concentration of expert opinions. The coefficient of variation and Kendall W coefficient were used to reflect the expert opinion coordination degree of the survey statement. Results The expert response rate for both rounds of surveys was 100% (41/41). Experts reached an agreement on 36 statements in five dimensions of preterm birth prevention and treatment in the first round of the survey and reached a consensus on the remaining 13 statements in the second round. A total of 49 statements (mean scores ≥3, full score ratio ≥20%, coefficient of variation ≤0.3) were explicitly included in this guideline to form recommendations, while the remaining three clinical issues that did not reach a consensus require further determination based on evidence quality. The Kendall W coefficient in the two rounds of the Delphi survey were 0.20 ( P < 0.001) and 0.29 ( P < 0.001). Conclusion The five dimensions and 49 statements, agreed upon through a two-round Delphi study, determined the recommended statements to be included in the updated guidelines for the prevention and treatment of preterm birth in China. The defined lower limit is set at ≥28 gestational weeks; however, an update has been made to the definition of premature birth, specifying that “with the consent of the mother and her family, treatment is not abandoned for viable infants ≥26 gestational weeks.”","PeriodicalId":53202,"journal":{"name":"Maternal-Fetal Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using the Delphi Technique to Achieve Consensus on Prevention and Treatment of Preterm Single Birth in China\",\"authors\":\"Taishun Li, Zhe Liu, Huixia Yang, Yali Hu\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/fm9.0000000000000201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Objective This study aimed to reach a consensus among obstetric experts on the prevention and treatment of preterm single births in China. Methods Based on the scoping literature review and the 2014 edition of preterm birth of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment guidelines, we generated the Delphi survey statements with five evaluation dimensions, including the definition of preterm birth, exclusion of risk factors for preterm birth, prevention, and prediction of preterm birth, treatment of preterm birth, and evaluation of intervention outcomes of preterm birth. Obstetric experts from the Obstetrics and Gynecology Branch of the Chinese Medical Association formed the expert group for this survey. All the obstetric experts participated two-round modified Delphi survey via an anonymous online survey and an online panel. Mean scores, rank sum, full score ratio, and the lowest score ratio were calculated to reflect the concentration of expert opinions. The coefficient of variation and Kendall W coefficient were used to reflect the expert opinion coordination degree of the survey statement. Results The expert response rate for both rounds of surveys was 100% (41/41). Experts reached an agreement on 36 statements in five dimensions of preterm birth prevention and treatment in the first round of the survey and reached a consensus on the remaining 13 statements in the second round. A total of 49 statements (mean scores ≥3, full score ratio ≥20%, coefficient of variation ≤0.3) were explicitly included in this guideline to form recommendations, while the remaining three clinical issues that did not reach a consensus require further determination based on evidence quality. The Kendall W coefficient in the two rounds of the Delphi survey were 0.20 ( P < 0.001) and 0.29 ( P < 0.001). Conclusion The five dimensions and 49 statements, agreed upon through a two-round Delphi study, determined the recommended statements to be included in the updated guidelines for the prevention and treatment of preterm birth in China. The defined lower limit is set at ≥28 gestational weeks; however, an update has been made to the definition of premature birth, specifying that “with the consent of the mother and her family, treatment is not abandoned for viable infants ≥26 gestational weeks.”\",\"PeriodicalId\":53202,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Maternal-Fetal Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Maternal-Fetal Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/fm9.0000000000000201\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maternal-Fetal Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/fm9.0000000000000201","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

【摘要】目的探讨中国产科专家对早产单胎的预防和治疗的共识。方法在文献综述的基础上,结合2014年版《早产临床诊疗指南》,从早产的定义、早产危险因素的排除、早产的预防与预测、早产的治疗、早产的干预效果评价等5个评价维度,生成德尔菲调查问卷。本次调查由中华医学会妇产科分会的产科专家组成专家组。所有产科专家通过匿名在线调查和在线小组调查的方式参与了两轮修改德尔菲调查。计算平均分、排名和、满分比和最低分比,反映专家意见的集中程度。用变异系数和Kendall W系数反映调查陈述的专家意见协调程度。结果两轮调查专家答复率均为100%(41/41)。专家们在第一次调查中就预防和治疗早产的5个领域的36项意见达成了一致意见,并在第二次调查中就其余13项意见达成了一致意见。本指南明确纳入49项陈述(平均评分≥3分,满分比≥20%,变异系数≤0.3)形成建议,其余3项临床问题未达成共识,需根据证据质量进一步确定。两轮德尔菲调查的Kendall W系数为0.20 (P <0.001)和0.29 (P <0.001)。结论通过两轮德尔菲研究确定了5个维度和49个陈述,确定了中国预防和治疗早产指南更新的建议陈述。定义的下限设定为≥28孕周;然而,对早产的定义进行了更新,明确指出“经母亲及其家人同意,对≥26孕周的可存活婴儿不放弃治疗。”
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Using the Delphi Technique to Achieve Consensus on Prevention and Treatment of Preterm Single Birth in China
Abstract Objective This study aimed to reach a consensus among obstetric experts on the prevention and treatment of preterm single births in China. Methods Based on the scoping literature review and the 2014 edition of preterm birth of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment guidelines, we generated the Delphi survey statements with five evaluation dimensions, including the definition of preterm birth, exclusion of risk factors for preterm birth, prevention, and prediction of preterm birth, treatment of preterm birth, and evaluation of intervention outcomes of preterm birth. Obstetric experts from the Obstetrics and Gynecology Branch of the Chinese Medical Association formed the expert group for this survey. All the obstetric experts participated two-round modified Delphi survey via an anonymous online survey and an online panel. Mean scores, rank sum, full score ratio, and the lowest score ratio were calculated to reflect the concentration of expert opinions. The coefficient of variation and Kendall W coefficient were used to reflect the expert opinion coordination degree of the survey statement. Results The expert response rate for both rounds of surveys was 100% (41/41). Experts reached an agreement on 36 statements in five dimensions of preterm birth prevention and treatment in the first round of the survey and reached a consensus on the remaining 13 statements in the second round. A total of 49 statements (mean scores ≥3, full score ratio ≥20%, coefficient of variation ≤0.3) were explicitly included in this guideline to form recommendations, while the remaining three clinical issues that did not reach a consensus require further determination based on evidence quality. The Kendall W coefficient in the two rounds of the Delphi survey were 0.20 ( P < 0.001) and 0.29 ( P < 0.001). Conclusion The five dimensions and 49 statements, agreed upon through a two-round Delphi study, determined the recommended statements to be included in the updated guidelines for the prevention and treatment of preterm birth in China. The defined lower limit is set at ≥28 gestational weeks; however, an update has been made to the definition of premature birth, specifying that “with the consent of the mother and her family, treatment is not abandoned for viable infants ≥26 gestational weeks.”
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Maternal-Fetal Medicine
Maternal-Fetal Medicine OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
119
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Detection of an 8p23.1 Inversion Using High-Resolution Optical Genome Mapping Unique Ultrastructural Alterations in the Placenta Associated With Macrosomia Induced by Gestational Diabetes Mellitus Prenatal Diagnosis of Fukuyama Congenital Muscular Dystrophy by Optical Genomic Mapping in a Chinese Family Optical Genome Mapping for Cryptic Chromosomal Rearrangements Identification in Clinical Practice Noninvasive Prenatal Testing Test Versus Chorionic Villus Sampling, Where Are We Now?
×
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