Using the modified Delphi method to establish clinical consensus for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with rotator cuff pathology

Abstract

BackgroundPatients presenting to the healthcare system with rotator cuff pathology do not always receive high quality care. High quality care occurs when a patient receives care that is accessible, appropriate, acceptable, effective, efficient, and safe. The aim of this study was twofold: 1) to develop a clinical pathway algorithm that sets forth a stepwise process for making decisions about the diagnosis and treatment of rotator cuff pathology presenting to primary, secondary, and tertiary healthcare settings; and 2) to establish clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of rotator cuff pathology to inform decision-making processes within the algorithm.MethodsA three-step modified Delphi method was used to establish consensus. Fourteen experts representing athletic therapy, physiotherapy, sport medicine, and orthopaedic surgery were invited to participate as the expert panel. In round 1, 123 best practice statements were distributed to the panel. Panel members were asked to mark “agree” or “disagree” beside each statement, and provide comments. The same voting method was again used for round 2. Round 3 consisted of a final face-to-face meeting.ResultsIn round 1, statements were grouped and reduced to 44 statements that met consensus. In round 2, five statements reached consensus. In round 3, ten statements reached consensus. Consensus was reached for 59 statements representing five domains: screening, diagnosis, physical examination, investigations, and treatment. The final face-to-face meeting was also used to develop clinical pathway algorithms (i.e., clinical care pathways) for three types of rotator cuff pathology: acute, chronic, and acute-on-chronic.ConclusionThis consensus guideline will help to standardize care, provide guidance on the diagnosis and treatment of rotator cuff pathology, and assist in clinical decision-making for all healthcare professionals.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12874-016-0165-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Improving transitions of care across the spectrum of healthcare delivery: A multidisciplinary approach to understanding variability in outcomes across hospitals and skilled nursing facilities

“…The Delphi approach was used, given support for its use in healthcare settings when consensus is needed around issues of limited clarity or evidence. 14 In the case of this study, while there was clear evidence for process gaps in transitions of care, recommendations for system-wide approaches to measurably impact transitions of care were neither agreed upon nor clearly understood by the stakeholders from the hospitals and SNFs. The members of the INFORM collaborative offered robust and diverse content expertise in the practical challenges that span the continuum of care transitions; therefore, we invited all members to participate in the prioritization study.…”

Poor overall quality of clinical practice guidelines for musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review

“…Other higher quality low back pain CPGs classified these conditions as non-specific low back pain 23 44. Similarly, in shoulder pain, there were CPGs for ‘rotator cuff tears’,57 ‘rotator cuff syndrome’,46 ‘rotator cuff pathology’58 and ‘sub acromial pain syndrome’ 59. Consistent and contemporary terminology to define MSK pain conditions, irrespective of developer/professional group, is needed to reduce inefficiencies and CPG replication.…”

Presenting signs and patient co‐variables in Gaucher disease: outcome of the Gaucher Earlier Diagnosis Consensus (GED‐C) Delphi initiative

“…Delphi methodology is widely used for gathering and processing data from experts to achieve convergence of opinion on a specific real‐world issue, often in the absence of sufficient evidence to provide adequate guidance . The technique has been used to generate simple, robust, expert experience‐based consensus in a variety of disease settings to improve diagnosis . An analysis of the relationship between the characteristics of Delphi surveys and variability in the consensus obtained found there was a little associated variation in consensus indices if the number of questions was in the range 6–40 (the maximum number in our survey was 26 in round 1); similarly, variability was modest if the number of respondents was in the range 6–50 (22 respondents to our survey) .…”