哮喘的疾病调整:我们走对路了吗?多学科专家德尔菲共识》(MODIASTHMA Consensus)。

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 ALLERGY Journal of Asthma and Allergy Pub Date : 2024-11-14 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JAA.S488764
Juan Carlos Miralles-López, Francisco J Alvarez-Gutiérrez, Julio Delgado-Romero, Santiago Quirce, Jose Gregorio Soto-Campos, Ruben Andújar-Espinosa, Sheila Cabrejos-Perotti, Manuel Castilla-Martínez, Isabel Flores-Martín, Manuel José Pajarón-Fernández, José Valverde-Molina
{"title":"哮喘的疾病调整:我们走对路了吗?多学科专家德尔菲共识》(MODIASTHMA Consensus)。","authors":"Juan Carlos Miralles-López, Francisco J Alvarez-Gutiérrez, Julio Delgado-Romero, Santiago Quirce, Jose Gregorio Soto-Campos, Ruben Andújar-Espinosa, Sheila Cabrejos-Perotti, Manuel Castilla-Martínez, Isabel Flores-Martín, Manuel José Pajarón-Fernández, José Valverde-Molina","doi":"10.2147/JAA.S488764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>With the advent of biological therapies, emerging concepts regarding establishing new targets in asthma management, such as disease modification, have entered the debate among the scientific community. The definitions that form the conceptual basis of this goal need to be agreed upon.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multidisciplinary expert group was assembled as the steering committee. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify the scientific background for constructing appropriate definitions. Based on the literature review and the clinical experience of the experts, the committee built a list of statements that could be applied to establish the definition of disease modification in asthma. After that, a Delphi validation was performed to assess the appropriateness of the list of statements. The questionnaire included a total of 22 statements, divided into \"Essential criteria for disease modification in asthma\" (5 statements) and \"Disease modification indicators and other considerations\" (17 statements). Panelists used a 9-point Likert scale to measure agreement on each statement. The cut-off point for high consensus was defined as a minimum score of 7 and had to be reached by at least two-thirds of the experts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 192 asthma experts voted on statements anonymously. Of those, 104 (54%) were Pneumologists, 65 (34%) were allergologists, and 23 (12%) were Pediatricians. An interim analysis of round 1 data was performed. All statements reached consensus on the first round, with a median score above 7 in all cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, in this Delphi study, a large number of experts in the management of severe asthma from different specialties agreed on the clinical-functional and pathophysiological aspects to be considered in order to try to achieve disease modification.</p>","PeriodicalId":15079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Asthma and Allergy","volume":"17 ","pages":"1163-1171"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11571985/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disease Modification in Asthma: Are We on the Right Way? A Multidisciplinary Expert Delphi Consensus (MODIASTHMA Consensus).\",\"authors\":\"Juan Carlos Miralles-López, Francisco J Alvarez-Gutiérrez, Julio Delgado-Romero, Santiago Quirce, Jose Gregorio Soto-Campos, Ruben Andújar-Espinosa, Sheila Cabrejos-Perotti, Manuel Castilla-Martínez, Isabel Flores-Martín, Manuel José Pajarón-Fernández, José Valverde-Molina\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/JAA.S488764\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>With the advent of biological therapies, emerging concepts regarding establishing new targets in asthma management, such as disease modification, have entered the debate among the scientific community. The definitions that form the conceptual basis of this goal need to be agreed upon.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A multidisciplinary expert group was assembled as the steering committee. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify the scientific background for constructing appropriate definitions. Based on the literature review and the clinical experience of the experts, the committee built a list of statements that could be applied to establish the definition of disease modification in asthma. After that, a Delphi validation was performed to assess the appropriateness of the list of statements. The questionnaire included a total of 22 statements, divided into \\\"Essential criteria for disease modification in asthma\\\" (5 statements) and \\\"Disease modification indicators and other considerations\\\" (17 statements). Panelists used a 9-point Likert scale to measure agreement on each statement. The cut-off point for high consensus was defined as a minimum score of 7 and had to be reached by at least two-thirds of the experts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 192 asthma experts voted on statements anonymously. Of those, 104 (54%) were Pneumologists, 65 (34%) were allergologists, and 23 (12%) were Pediatricians. An interim analysis of round 1 data was performed. All statements reached consensus on the first round, with a median score above 7 in all cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, in this Delphi study, a large number of experts in the management of severe asthma from different specialties agreed on the clinical-functional and pathophysiological aspects to be considered in order to try to achieve disease modification.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15079,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Asthma and Allergy\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"1163-1171\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11571985/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Asthma and Allergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/JAA.S488764\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Asthma and Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JAA.S488764","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:随着生物疗法的出现,有关在哮喘治疗中建立新目标(如疾病改变)的新概念在科学界引起了争论。需要就构成这一目标概念基础的定义达成一致:方法:组建了一个多学科专家小组作为指导委员会。方法:组建了一个多学科专家小组作为指导委员会,并进行了系统的文献回顾,以确定构建适当定义的科学背景。根据文献综述和专家们的临床经验,委员会列出了一份可用于确定哮喘疾病改变定义的声明清单。之后,委员会进行了德尔菲验证,以评估声明列表的适当性。问卷共包括 22 项陈述,分为 "哮喘疾病调整的基本标准"(5 项陈述)和 "疾病调整指标及其他考虑因素"(17 项陈述)。专家小组成员使用 9 点李克特量表来衡量对每项陈述的共识度。高度共识的临界点被定义为至少三分之二的专家达到 7 分:共有 192 位哮喘专家对声明进行了匿名投票。结果:共有 192 位哮喘专家对声明进行了匿名投票,其中 104 位(54%)为肺病专家,65 位(34%)为过敏学专家,23 位(12%)为儿科医生。对第一轮数据进行了中期分析。在第一轮中,所有声明都达成了共识,所有声明的中位数都超过了 7 分:总之,在这项德尔菲研究中,来自不同专业的众多重症哮喘治疗专家就临床功能和病理生理学方面达成了共识,以便努力实现疾病的缓解。
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
Disease Modification in Asthma: Are We on the Right Way? A Multidisciplinary Expert Delphi Consensus (MODIASTHMA Consensus).

Purpose: With the advent of biological therapies, emerging concepts regarding establishing new targets in asthma management, such as disease modification, have entered the debate among the scientific community. The definitions that form the conceptual basis of this goal need to be agreed upon.

Methods: A multidisciplinary expert group was assembled as the steering committee. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify the scientific background for constructing appropriate definitions. Based on the literature review and the clinical experience of the experts, the committee built a list of statements that could be applied to establish the definition of disease modification in asthma. After that, a Delphi validation was performed to assess the appropriateness of the list of statements. The questionnaire included a total of 22 statements, divided into "Essential criteria for disease modification in asthma" (5 statements) and "Disease modification indicators and other considerations" (17 statements). Panelists used a 9-point Likert scale to measure agreement on each statement. The cut-off point for high consensus was defined as a minimum score of 7 and had to be reached by at least two-thirds of the experts.

Results: A total of 192 asthma experts voted on statements anonymously. Of those, 104 (54%) were Pneumologists, 65 (34%) were allergologists, and 23 (12%) were Pediatricians. An interim analysis of round 1 data was performed. All statements reached consensus on the first round, with a median score above 7 in all cases.

Conclusion: In conclusion, in this Delphi study, a large number of experts in the management of severe asthma from different specialties agreed on the clinical-functional and pathophysiological aspects to be considered in order to try to achieve disease modification.

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
Journal of Asthma and Allergy
Journal of Asthma and Allergy Medicine-Immunology and Allergy
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
185
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: An international, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, reports, editorials and commentaries on the following topics: Asthma; Pulmonary physiology; Asthma related clinical health; Clinical immunology and the immunological basis of disease; Pharmacological interventions and new therapies. Although the main focus of the journal will be to publish research and clinical results in humans, preclinical, animal and in vitro studies will be published where they shed light on disease processes and potential new therapies.
期刊最新文献
Disease Modification in Asthma: Are We on the Right Way? A Multidisciplinary Expert Delphi Consensus (MODIASTHMA Consensus). Japanese Patients with Severe Asthma Identified as Responders to Omalizumab Treatment at 2 Years Based on the GETE Score Continued Treatment for an Extended Period. Differential Clinical Significance of FENO200 and CANO in Asthma, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and Asthma-COPD Overlap (ACO). Benralizumab: Effectiveness in Patients with Uncontrolled Severe Eosinophilic Asthma at 6 and 12 Months at a Third-Level Care Hospital. Capacity for ICS-LABA Therapy Reduction. Response to Disease Burden and Access to Biologic Therapy in Patients with Severe Asthma, 2017-2022: An Analysis of the International Severe Asthma Registry [Letter].
×
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