Evidence gaps in orthognathic surgery: an international Delphi study.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the evidence gaps identified in a recent mapping review of orthognathic surgery by evaluating them through consultation with maxillofacial surgeons. Using the Delphi technique, a panel of surgeons who regularly perform orthognathic surgery was engaged. Potential participants were identified through articles included in the mapping review, peer nominations, and social media platforms . Two rounds of surveys, incorporating Likert-type and open-ended questions, were conducted to gauge the clinical relevance of evidence gaps. Questions were refined based on responses from the initial round, with a consensus threshold set at 60%. Seventy-four surgeons participated in the first round and 55 in the second round (retention rate of 74%) . The intra-class correlation analysis revealed 'almost perfect' agreement in each round. Participants in the first round proposed 11 new evidence gaps. A list of 15 potentially clinically relevant research questions was compiled to guide future investigations in orthognathic surgery. This collaborative Delphi study between researchers and clinicians has explored the existing understanding of the clinical relevance of potential evidence gaps in orthognathic surgery. The study findings offer others a pathway to address information gaps and guide future research endeavours.