{"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}
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.