Experts Achieve Consensus on a Majority of Statements Regarding Ethics, Transparency, Regulation, and Best Practices for the Use of Orthobiologics.

IF 4.4 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Ron Gilat, Sarah A Muth, Eoghan T Hurley, Allen A Yazdi, Chloe H Franzia, Scott A Rodeo, Shane A Shapiro, Rachel M Frank, Brian J Cole
{"title":"Experts Achieve Consensus on a Majority of Statements Regarding Ethics, Transparency, Regulation, and Best Practices for the Use of Orthobiologics.","authors":"Ron Gilat, Sarah A Muth, Eoghan T Hurley, Allen A Yazdi, Chloe H Franzia, Scott A Rodeo, Shane A Shapiro, Rachel M Frank, Brian J Cole","doi":"10.1016/j.arthro.2025.01.062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To establish consensus statements via a modified Delphi process about ethics, transparency, regulation, and best practices for the use of orthobiologics in clinical practice for musculoskeletal pathology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A consensus process on the regulation of orthobiologics at the provider level was conducted using a modified Delphi technique. Twenty orthopaedic surgeons, sports medicine physicians, or basic scientists participated. Each participant was a Biologic Association member organization representative and asked to participate because of their active interest in the field of orthobiologics. Levels of consensus were delineated according to the number of votes for each statement: no consensus, <80%; consensus, 80% to 89%; strong consensus, 90% to 99%; unanimous, 100%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 26 consensus statements on orthobiologics resulted in 14 achieving unanimous consensus, 8 achieving strong consensus, 3 achieving consensus, and 1 did not achieve consensus. Overall, 85% of the statements reached either a unanimous or strong consensus. Of the statements regarding communication and transparency, 9 reached unanimous consensus, including information to convey and helpful tools to describe current orthobiologics, persistent misinformation, use of the word \"stem cells,\" \"off-label\" use, and problems with the present regulatory environment. Five statements discussing the regulation of novel orthobiologics achieved unanimous consensus. These statements highlighted research regulation, safety, and suggested improvements to regulatory issues. The statement that did not achieve any consensus was on the regulatory processes that should be in place by an institution providing novel orthobiologic treatments. No statement reached a unanimous agreement on cost or ethical considerations.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study successfully identified key consensus statements emphasizing the importance of ethics, transparency, and regulation in the use of orthobiologics, with 85% of statements reaching unanimous or strong consensus. These findings underscore the need for standardized communication, improved regulatory frameworks, and enhanced safety measures while highlighting persistent challenges in addressing cost and ethical considerations.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level V, expert opinion.</p>","PeriodicalId":55459,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2025.01.062","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To establish consensus statements via a modified Delphi process about ethics, transparency, regulation, and best practices for the use of orthobiologics in clinical practice for musculoskeletal pathology.

Methods: A consensus process on the regulation of orthobiologics at the provider level was conducted using a modified Delphi technique. Twenty orthopaedic surgeons, sports medicine physicians, or basic scientists participated. Each participant was a Biologic Association member organization representative and asked to participate because of their active interest in the field of orthobiologics. Levels of consensus were delineated according to the number of votes for each statement: no consensus, <80%; consensus, 80% to 89%; strong consensus, 90% to 99%; unanimous, 100%.

Results: The 26 consensus statements on orthobiologics resulted in 14 achieving unanimous consensus, 8 achieving strong consensus, 3 achieving consensus, and 1 did not achieve consensus. Overall, 85% of the statements reached either a unanimous or strong consensus. Of the statements regarding communication and transparency, 9 reached unanimous consensus, including information to convey and helpful tools to describe current orthobiologics, persistent misinformation, use of the word "stem cells," "off-label" use, and problems with the present regulatory environment. Five statements discussing the regulation of novel orthobiologics achieved unanimous consensus. These statements highlighted research regulation, safety, and suggested improvements to regulatory issues. The statement that did not achieve any consensus was on the regulatory processes that should be in place by an institution providing novel orthobiologic treatments. No statement reached a unanimous agreement on cost or ethical considerations.

Conclusions: This study successfully identified key consensus statements emphasizing the importance of ethics, transparency, and regulation in the use of orthobiologics, with 85% of statements reaching unanimous or strong consensus. These findings underscore the need for standardized communication, improved regulatory frameworks, and enhanced safety measures while highlighting persistent challenges in addressing cost and ethical considerations.

Level of evidence: Level V, expert opinion.

专家们就骨科使用的伦理、透明度、监管和最佳实践的大多数声明达成共识。
目的:通过改进的德尔菲过程建立关于在肌肉骨骼病理学临床实践中使用骨科的伦理、透明度、监管和最佳实践的共识声明。方法:采用改进的德尔菲技术,在提供者层面就骨科的监管达成共识。20名骨科医生、运动医学医师或基础科学家参与了研究。每位参与者都是生物学协会成员组织的代表,由于他们对骨科领域的积极兴趣而被要求参加。结果:26份关于骨科的共识声明中,14份达成一致,8份达成强烈共识,3份达成共识,1份未达成共识。总体而言,85%的声明达成了一致或强烈的共识。在关于沟通和透明度的声明中,9项达成了一致的共识,包括传达的信息和描述当前骨科的有用工具、持续的错误信息、“干细胞”一词的使用、“标签外”使用以及当前监管环境的问题。五项声明讨论了新型骨科的监管达成了一致的共识。这些声明强调了研究法规、安全性,并建议对法规问题进行改进。没有达成任何共识的声明是关于提供新型骨科治疗的机构应该实施的监管程序。没有一份声明就成本或伦理考虑达成一致。结论:本研究成功地确定了强调骨科使用中伦理、透明度和监管重要性的关键共识声明,85%的声明达成了一致或强烈共识。这些发现强调了标准化沟通、改进监管框架和加强安全措施的必要性,同时强调了在解决成本和道德考虑方面的持续挑战。证据等级:V级,专家意见。
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
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
17.00%
发文量
555
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: Nowhere is minimally invasive surgery explained better than in Arthroscopy, the leading peer-reviewed journal in the field. Every issue enables you to put into perspective the usefulness of the various emerging arthroscopic techniques. The advantages and disadvantages of these methods -- along with their applications in various situations -- are discussed in relation to their efficiency, efficacy and cost benefit. As a special incentive, paid subscribers also receive access to the journal expanded website.
×
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