德尔菲共识调查:难治性溃疡性直肠炎患者及其医护人员的意见。

IF 3.3 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY BMJ Open Gastroenterology Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.1136/bmjgast-2023-001139
Maro Kyriacou, Shellie Radford, Gordon W Moran
{"title":"德尔菲共识调查:难治性溃疡性直肠炎患者及其医护人员的意见。","authors":"Maro Kyriacou,&nbsp;Shellie Radford,&nbsp;Gordon W Moran","doi":"10.1136/bmjgast-2023-001139","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Refractory ulcerative proctitis presents a huge clinical challenge not only for the patients living with this chronic, progressive condition but also for the professionals who care for them. Currently, there is limited research and evidence-based guidance, resulting in many patients living with the symptomatic burden of disease and reduced quality of life. The aim of this study was to establish a consensus on the thoughts and opinions related to refractory proctitis disease burden and best practice for management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A three-round Delphi consensus survey was conducted among patients living with refractory proctitis and the healthcare experts with knowledge on this disease from the UK. A brainstorming stage involving a focus group where the participants came up with an initial list of statements was completed. Following this, there were three rounds of Delphi surveys in which the participants were asked to rank the importance of the statements and provide any additional comments or clarifications. Calculation of mean scores, analysis of comments and revisions were performed to produce a final list of statements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 14 statements were suggested by the focus group at the initial brainstorming stage. Following completion of three Delphi survey rounds, all 14 statements reached consensus following appropriate revision.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We established consensus on the thoughts and opinions related to refractory proctitis from both the experts who manage this disease and the patients living with it. This represents the first step towards developing clinical research data and ultimately the evidence needed for best practice management guidance of this condition.</p>","PeriodicalId":9235,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Open Gastroenterology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7d/30/bmjgast-2023-001139.PMC10230891.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Delphi consensus survey: the opinions of patients living with refractory ulcerative proctitis and the health care professionals who care for them.\",\"authors\":\"Maro Kyriacou,&nbsp;Shellie Radford,&nbsp;Gordon W Moran\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjgast-2023-001139\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Refractory ulcerative proctitis presents a huge clinical challenge not only for the patients living with this chronic, progressive condition but also for the professionals who care for them. Currently, there is limited research and evidence-based guidance, resulting in many patients living with the symptomatic burden of disease and reduced quality of life. The aim of this study was to establish a consensus on the thoughts and opinions related to refractory proctitis disease burden and best practice for management.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A three-round Delphi consensus survey was conducted among patients living with refractory proctitis and the healthcare experts with knowledge on this disease from the UK. A brainstorming stage involving a focus group where the participants came up with an initial list of statements was completed. Following this, there were three rounds of Delphi surveys in which the participants were asked to rank the importance of the statements and provide any additional comments or clarifications. Calculation of mean scores, analysis of comments and revisions were performed to produce a final list of statements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 14 statements were suggested by the focus group at the initial brainstorming stage. Following completion of three Delphi survey rounds, all 14 statements reached consensus following appropriate revision.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We established consensus on the thoughts and opinions related to refractory proctitis from both the experts who manage this disease and the patients living with it. This represents the first step towards developing clinical research data and ultimately the evidence needed for best practice management guidance of this condition.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9235,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Open Gastroenterology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7d/30/bmjgast-2023-001139.PMC10230891.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Open Gastroenterology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2023-001139\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Open Gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2023-001139","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:难治性溃疡性直肠炎不仅对患有这种慢性进行性疾病的患者提出了巨大的临床挑战,而且对照顾他们的专业人员也是如此。目前,研究和循证指导有限,导致许多患者生活在有症状的疾病负担中,生活质量下降。本研究的目的是建立对难治性直肠炎疾病负担和最佳管理实践的共识。方法:对来自英国的难治性直肠炎患者和具有该疾病知识的医疗保健专家进行三轮德尔菲共识调查。在一个涉及焦点小组的头脑风暴阶段,参与者提出了一个初步的陈述清单。在此之后,有三轮德尔菲调查,参与者被要求对陈述的重要性进行排名,并提供任何额外的评论或澄清。计算平均分数,分析评论和修订,以产生最终的陈述列表。结果:在最初的头脑风暴阶段,焦点小组总共提出了14条陈述。在完成三轮德尔菲调查后,经过适当的修改,所有14项陈述都达成了共识。结论:我们对难治性直肠炎的治疗专家和患者的想法和意见达成了共识。这代表了开发临床研究数据的第一步,并最终成为该病症最佳实践管理指导所需的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Delphi consensus survey: the opinions of patients living with refractory ulcerative proctitis and the health care professionals who care for them.

Background: Refractory ulcerative proctitis presents a huge clinical challenge not only for the patients living with this chronic, progressive condition but also for the professionals who care for them. Currently, there is limited research and evidence-based guidance, resulting in many patients living with the symptomatic burden of disease and reduced quality of life. The aim of this study was to establish a consensus on the thoughts and opinions related to refractory proctitis disease burden and best practice for management.

Methods: A three-round Delphi consensus survey was conducted among patients living with refractory proctitis and the healthcare experts with knowledge on this disease from the UK. A brainstorming stage involving a focus group where the participants came up with an initial list of statements was completed. Following this, there were three rounds of Delphi surveys in which the participants were asked to rank the importance of the statements and provide any additional comments or clarifications. Calculation of mean scores, analysis of comments and revisions were performed to produce a final list of statements.

Results: In total, 14 statements were suggested by the focus group at the initial brainstorming stage. Following completion of three Delphi survey rounds, all 14 statements reached consensus following appropriate revision.

Conclusions: We established consensus on the thoughts and opinions related to refractory proctitis from both the experts who manage this disease and the patients living with it. This represents the first step towards developing clinical research data and ultimately the evidence needed for best practice management guidance of this condition.

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
BMJ Open Gastroenterology
BMJ Open Gastroenterology GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.20%
发文量
68
审稿时长
2 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Open Gastroenterology is an online-only, peer-reviewed, open access gastroenterology journal, dedicated to publishing high-quality medical research from all disciplines and therapeutic areas of gastroenterology. It is the open access companion journal of Gut and is co-owned by the British Society of Gastroenterology. The journal publishes all research study types, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialist studies. Publishing procedures are built around continuous publication, publishing research online as soon as the article is ready.
期刊最新文献
Home-based EXercise and motivAtional programme before and after Liver Transplantation (EXALT): study protocol for phase II two-centre, randomised controlled trial. Patients’ and health professionals’ research priorities for chronic pain associated with inflammatory bowel disease: a co-produced sequential mixed methods Delphi consensus study Serum amyloid A for predicting prognosis in patients with newly diagnosed Crohn’s disease Diagnostic application of the ColonFlag AI tool in combination with faecal immunochemical test in patients on an urgent lower gastrointestinal cancer pathway Associations of gut microbiota features and circulating metabolites with systemic inflammation in children.
×
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