The Delphi technique is a systematic process of forecasting using the collective opinion of panel members. The structured method of developing consensus among panel members using Delphi methodology has gained acceptance in diverse fields of medicine. The Delphi methods assumed a pivotal role in the last few decades to develop best practice guidance using collective intelligence where research is limited, ethically/logistically difficult or evidence is conflicting. However, the attempts to assess the quality standard of Delphi studies have reported significant variance, and details of the process followed are usually unclear. We recommend systematic quality tools for evaluation of Delphi methodology; identification of problem area of research, selection of panel, anonymity of panelists, controlled feedback, iterative Delphi rounds, consensus criteria, analysis of consensus, closing criteria, and stability of the results. Based on these nine qualitative evaluation points, we assessed the quality of Delphi studies in the medical field related to coronavirus disease 2019. There was inconsistency in reporting vital elements of Delphi methods such as identification of panel members, defining consensus, closing criteria for rounds, and presenting the results. We propose our evaluation points for researchers, medical journal editorial boards, and reviewers to evaluate the quality of the Delphi methods in healthcare research.
Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice. Methods Using a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable). Results Agreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16–24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment. Conclusion Using a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited. Trial registration: The study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.
Introduction There are various reports of air leaks with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We undertook a systematic review of all published case reports and series to analyse the types of air leaks in COVID-19 and their outcomes. Methods The literature search from PubMed, Science Direct, and Google Scholar databases was performed from the start of the pandemic till 31 March 2021. The inclusion criteria were case reports or series on (1) laboratory-confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, (2) with the individual patient details, and (3) reported diagnosis of one or more air leak syndrome (pneumothorax, subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastinum, pneumoperitoneum, pneumopericardium). Results A total of 105 studies with 188 patients were included in the final analysis. The median age was 56.02 (SD 15.53) years, 80% males, 11% had previous respiratory disease, and 8% were smokers. Severe or critical COVID-19 was present in 50.6% of the patients. Pneumothorax (68%) was the most common type of air leak. Most patients (56.7%) required intervention with lower mortality (29.1% vs. 44.1%, p = 0.07) and intercostal drain (95.9%) was the preferred interventional management. More than half of the patients developed air leak on spontaneous breathing. The mortality was significantly higher in patients who developed air leak with positive pressure ventilation (49%, p < 0.001) and required escalation of respiratory support (39%, p = 0.006). Conclusion Air leak in COVID-19 can occur spontaneously without positive pressure ventilation, higher transpulmonary pressures, and other risk factors like previous respiratory disease or smoking. The mortality is significantly higher if associated with positive pressure ventilation and escalation of respiratory support.
Objective:To evaluate the rate of seropositivity to hepatitis B and C and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infections among children with β-thalassemia major receiving multiple transfusions in Ahmedabad, India, compared with healthy controls.Materials and Methods:The study was performed during January 2007 to January 2009 on multi-transfused children suffering with β-thalassemia major registered in the Prathama Blood Centre, Ahmedabad; Jeevandeep hospital, Ahmedabad; and Red Cross Blood Centre, Ahmedabad, and investigated for the prevalence and development of transfusion-transmitted infections. Hepatitis B surface Antigen (HBsAg), anti-Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Antibodies (Ab), and HIV Ab were checked using a fourth-generation Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA). Positive tests were confirmed by western blots. Healthy blood donors were used for the control group.Results:Hepatitis B surface antigen, anti-HCV Ab, and HIV Ab were positive in one of 96 (1.04%; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) = 0.17–1.3), 24 of 96 (25%; 95% CI = 11.4–14.2), and one of 96 (1.04%; 95% CI = 0.12–1.3), respectively. The rate of anti-HCV Ab was significantly higher in multi-transfused children suffering with β-thalassemia major. In thalassemia patients, the rate of positive anti-HCV Ab was significantly higher than that for positive HBsAg (P<0.001) and HIV Ab (P<0.001).Conclusion:It is concluded that HCV is the current major problem in multi-transfused children with thalassemia major and more careful pretransfusion screening of blood for anti-HCV must be introduced in blood centers.
Life long red blood transfusion remains the main treatment for b thalassemia major patients. The development of alloantibodies complicates transfusion therapy in thalassemia patients. Alloimmunization to red cell antigens is one of the most important immunological transfusion reaction and causes delayed type of transfusion reaction. A prospective study was conducted from January 2007 to January 2010. This was a cohorts of 115 patients were selected from regular transfusion group and they were followed for two and half year. They were followed up for the effect of transfusion during study period. There was a decline in patient number from 115 to 96 due to mortality and transfer of patient. A total of 96 multiply transfused thalassemia patients were prospectively included in this study and three consecutive samples collected after every 6 months and investigated for the development of alloantibody to red cell antigens. Tests for antibody screening and identification were performed on preserved sample to investigate prevalence and development of red cell alloimmunization by standardized laboratory techniques by same person at Prathama Blood Centre. A total of 96 patients were included in the study. 63 patients were males and 33 females. A total of five single alloantibodies were formed in five patients out of them four (80 %) belonged to Kell blood group system and one (20 %) from Rh system. It was observed that two (1.92 %) of new thalassemia patients developed red cell alloantibodies during study period. Red cell alloimmunization should be kept in mind in the patients receiving multiple transfusions. In present study, alloimmunization rate was 5.21 %. Mean transfusion duration in these patients was 23.90 days, probably due to presence of alloantibody. RBC alloantibody detection on regular interval and corresponding antigen negative blood transfusion is strongly recommended in transfusion dependent thalassemia patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.