膝关节软骨损伤的临床和研究随访--国际共识声明

{"title":"膝关节软骨损伤的临床和研究随访--国际共识声明","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jcjp.2024.100192","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Articular cartilage injuries of the knee are a complex and challenging clinical pathology.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a Delphi process on clinical and research follow-up for knee cartilage injuries.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A consensus process on knee cartilage injuries utilizing a modified Delphi technique was conducted. Seventy-seven surgeons across 17 countries were invited to participate in these consensus statements. Nine questions were generated on clinical and research follow-up, with 3 rounds of questionnaires and final voting occurring. Consensus was defined as achieving 80% to 89% agreement, whereas strong consensus was defined as 90% to 99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was defined as 100% agreement with a proposed statement.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 9 total questions and consensus statements on clinical and research follow-up developed from 3 rounds of voting, 1 achieved unanimous consensus, 5 achieved strong consensus, 1 achieved consensus, and 2 did not achieve consensus.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The statement that achieved unanimous consensus was on physical examination findings. The statements that achieved strong consensus were related to defining and monitoring treatment success, patient-reported outcomes, research follow-up, and second-look arthroscopy in the setting of recurrence. The statements that did not achieve consensus were related to routine imaging and length of clinical follow-up after operative intervention.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100760,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cartilage & Joint Preservation","volume":"4 3","pages":"Article 100192"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical and research follow-up for knee cartilage injuries—an international consensus statement\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcjp.2024.100192\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Articular cartilage injuries of the knee are a complex and challenging clinical pathology.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a Delphi process on clinical and research follow-up for knee cartilage injuries.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A consensus process on knee cartilage injuries utilizing a modified Delphi technique was conducted. Seventy-seven surgeons across 17 countries were invited to participate in these consensus statements. Nine questions were generated on clinical and research follow-up, with 3 rounds of questionnaires and final voting occurring. Consensus was defined as achieving 80% to 89% agreement, whereas strong consensus was defined as 90% to 99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was defined as 100% agreement with a proposed statement.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 9 total questions and consensus statements on clinical and research follow-up developed from 3 rounds of voting, 1 achieved unanimous consensus, 5 achieved strong consensus, 1 achieved consensus, and 2 did not achieve consensus.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The statement that achieved unanimous consensus was on physical examination findings. The statements that achieved strong consensus were related to defining and monitoring treatment success, patient-reported outcomes, research follow-up, and second-look arthroscopy in the setting of recurrence. The statements that did not achieve consensus were related to routine imaging and length of clinical follow-up after operative intervention.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100760,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cartilage & Joint Preservation\",\"volume\":\"4 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 100192\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cartilage & Joint Preservation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667254524000283\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cartilage & Joint Preservation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667254524000283","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:膝关节软骨损伤是一种复杂且具有挑战性的临床病理学。本研究的目的是通过德尔菲法就膝关节软骨损伤的临床和研究后续行动达成共识。方法采用改良德尔菲法就膝关节软骨损伤达成共识。17个国家的77名外科医生受邀参与了这些共识声明。就临床和后续研究提出了九个问题,并进行了三轮问卷调查和最终投票。结果 在经过 3 轮投票产生的 9 个临床和研究随访问题和共识声明中,1 个达成了一致共识,5 个达成了强烈共识,1 个达成了共识,2 个未达成共识。达成强烈共识的声明涉及治疗成功的定义和监测、患者报告的结果、研究随访以及复发情况下的二次关节镜检查。未达成共识的声明涉及常规成像和手术干预后的临床随访时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical and research follow-up for knee cartilage injuries—an international consensus statement

Introduction

Articular cartilage injuries of the knee are a complex and challenging clinical pathology.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a Delphi process on clinical and research follow-up for knee cartilage injuries.

Methods

A consensus process on knee cartilage injuries utilizing a modified Delphi technique was conducted. Seventy-seven surgeons across 17 countries were invited to participate in these consensus statements. Nine questions were generated on clinical and research follow-up, with 3 rounds of questionnaires and final voting occurring. Consensus was defined as achieving 80% to 89% agreement, whereas strong consensus was defined as 90% to 99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was defined as 100% agreement with a proposed statement.

Results

Of the 9 total questions and consensus statements on clinical and research follow-up developed from 3 rounds of voting, 1 achieved unanimous consensus, 5 achieved strong consensus, 1 achieved consensus, and 2 did not achieve consensus.

Conclusions

The statement that achieved unanimous consensus was on physical examination findings. The statements that achieved strong consensus were related to defining and monitoring treatment success, patient-reported outcomes, research follow-up, and second-look arthroscopy in the setting of recurrence. The statements that did not achieve consensus were related to routine imaging and length of clinical follow-up after operative intervention.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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