Development of a Bladder Injury Classification System for Endoscopic Procedures: A Mixed-methods Study Involving Expert Consensus and Validation.

IF 5.4 3区 材料科学 Q2 CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL
Burak Akgül, Atınc Tozsin, Theodoros Tokas, Salvatore Micali, Thomas Herrmann, Giampaolo Bianchi, Cristian Fiori, Nurullah Altınkaya, Gernot Ortner, Thomas Knoll, Karin Lehrich, Axel Böhme, Nariman Gadzhiev, Mohamed Omar, Ioannis Kartalas Goumas, Javier Romero Otero, Abdullatif Aydın, Lukas Lusuardi, Christopher Netsch, Azhar Khan, Francesco Greco, Prokar Dasgupta, Lütfi Tunc, Jans Rassweiler, Ali Serdar Gozen, Kamran Ahmed, Selçuk Güven
{"title":"Development of a Bladder Injury Classification System for Endoscopic Procedures: A Mixed-methods Study Involving Expert Consensus and Validation.","authors":"Burak Akgül, Atınc Tozsin, Theodoros Tokas, Salvatore Micali, Thomas Herrmann, Giampaolo Bianchi, Cristian Fiori, Nurullah Altınkaya, Gernot Ortner, Thomas Knoll, Karin Lehrich, Axel Böhme, Nariman Gadzhiev, Mohamed Omar, Ioannis Kartalas Goumas, Javier Romero Otero, Abdullatif Aydın, Lukas Lusuardi, Christopher Netsch, Azhar Khan, Francesco Greco, Prokar Dasgupta, Lütfi Tunc, Jans Rassweiler, Ali Serdar Gozen, Kamran Ahmed, Selçuk Güven","doi":"10.1016/j.euf.2024.09.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>The widespread adoption and rapid integration of new technologies and techniques in endoscopic and laser bladder interventions, particularly endoscopic enucleation, have led to new types of bladder injuries. This underscores the need for an intraoperative injury classification system. This study aims to develop and validate the Bladder Injury Classification System for Endoscopic Procedures (BICEP), which standardizes the classification of complications and intervention requirements.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This mixed-methods study involved experts from the European Association of Urology Section of Urotechnology to standardize and validate the BICEP classification system. An iterative process involving focus groups, expert surveys, and revisions assessed clarity, relevance, comprehensiveness, and practicality. Validity was confirmed through expert surveys conducted in two rounds for face and content validity, using a 5-point Likert scale to correlate ratings with expected outcomes.</p><p><strong>Key findings and limitations: </strong>The novel BICEP classification system categorizes bladder injuries into ten subcategories with scores ranging from 0 to 4, reflecting injury severity and management requirements. Face validity was demonstrated by a 95% consensus on the system's clarity, relevance, and comprehensiveness. Content validity was supported by high acceptance rates in expert surveys, with average scores of 4.53 and 4.58 in the first and second rounds, respectively. This demonstrates strong support for its applicability in clinical practice. However, the primary limitation is the lack of external validation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and clinical implications: </strong>Our study demonstrates that the BICEP system is a robust and comprehensive classification system, with strong support for its face and content validity. The BICEP system is a proposal based on expert opinion, and additional studies are necessary to ensure its widespread adoption and efficacy.</p><p><strong>Patient summary: </strong>Our study addressed the critical need for standardized classification in the increasingly widespread context of urology endoscopic technologies by focusing on intraoperative evaluation, reporting, and standardization of bladder injuries. This study provides a globally standardized basis for the classification and treatment of bladder injuries in urology endoscopic procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":4,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Energy Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Energy Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2024.09.004","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objective: The widespread adoption and rapid integration of new technologies and techniques in endoscopic and laser bladder interventions, particularly endoscopic enucleation, have led to new types of bladder injuries. This underscores the need for an intraoperative injury classification system. This study aims to develop and validate the Bladder Injury Classification System for Endoscopic Procedures (BICEP), which standardizes the classification of complications and intervention requirements.

Methods: This mixed-methods study involved experts from the European Association of Urology Section of Urotechnology to standardize and validate the BICEP classification system. An iterative process involving focus groups, expert surveys, and revisions assessed clarity, relevance, comprehensiveness, and practicality. Validity was confirmed through expert surveys conducted in two rounds for face and content validity, using a 5-point Likert scale to correlate ratings with expected outcomes.

Key findings and limitations: The novel BICEP classification system categorizes bladder injuries into ten subcategories with scores ranging from 0 to 4, reflecting injury severity and management requirements. Face validity was demonstrated by a 95% consensus on the system's clarity, relevance, and comprehensiveness. Content validity was supported by high acceptance rates in expert surveys, with average scores of 4.53 and 4.58 in the first and second rounds, respectively. This demonstrates strong support for its applicability in clinical practice. However, the primary limitation is the lack of external validation.

Conclusions and clinical implications: Our study demonstrates that the BICEP system is a robust and comprehensive classification system, with strong support for its face and content validity. The BICEP system is a proposal based on expert opinion, and additional studies are necessary to ensure its widespread adoption and efficacy.

Patient summary: Our study addressed the critical need for standardized classification in the increasingly widespread context of urology endoscopic technologies by focusing on intraoperative evaluation, reporting, and standardization of bladder injuries. This study provides a globally standardized basis for the classification and treatment of bladder injuries in urology endoscopic procedures.

为内窥镜手术开发膀胱损伤分类系统:涉及专家共识和验证的混合方法研究。
背景和目的:内窥镜和激光膀胱介入术(尤其是内窥镜膀胱造影术)中新技术和新工艺的广泛采用和快速整合导致了新型膀胱损伤。这凸显了对术中损伤分类系统的需求。本研究旨在开发和验证内窥镜手术膀胱损伤分类系统(BICEP),该系统对并发症和干预要求进行了标准化分类:这项混合方法研究由欧洲泌尿外科协会泌尿技术分会的专家参与,目的是对 BICEP 分类系统进行标准化和验证。通过焦点小组、专家调查和修订等迭代过程,对清晰度、相关性、全面性和实用性进行了评估。通过两轮专家调查确认了面效和内容效度,采用 5 分李克特量表将评分与预期结果相关联:新颖的 BICEP 分类系统将膀胱损伤分为 10 个子类别,分值从 0 到 4 不等,反映了损伤的严重程度和管理要求。95%的人对该系统的清晰度、相关性和全面性达成共识,证明了其表面效度。专家调查的高接受率支持了内容有效性,第一轮和第二轮的平均得分分别为 4.53 和 4.58。这表明其在临床实践中的适用性得到了强有力的支持。然而,其主要局限性在于缺乏外部验证:我们的研究表明,BICEP 系统是一个强大而全面的分类系统,其表面效度和内容效度都得到了有力的支持。BICEP系统是基于专家意见提出的建议,有必要进行更多研究以确保其广泛采用和有效性。患者总结:我们的研究通过关注膀胱损伤的术中评估、报告和标准化,满足了在泌尿内镜技术日益普及的背景下对标准化分类的迫切需求。这项研究为泌尿内镜手术中膀胱损伤的分类和治疗提供了全球标准化基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Energy Materials
ACS Applied Energy Materials Materials Science-Materials Chemistry
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
1368
期刊介绍: ACS Applied Energy Materials is an interdisciplinary journal publishing original research covering all aspects of materials, engineering, chemistry, physics and biology relevant to energy conversion and storage. The journal is devoted to reports of new and original experimental and theoretical research of an applied nature that integrate knowledge in the areas of materials, engineering, physics, bioscience, and chemistry into important energy applications.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信