The development of recommendations for the assessment and management of sesamoiditis by podiatrists: A Delphi and content validity study.

Introduction: Sesamoiditis is a common, and often painful, musculoskeletal pathology frequently encountered by podiatrists. However, there are currently no recommendations to guide podiatrists in the assessment and management of people with sesamoiditis. The aim of this study was to develop consensus-driven clinical recommendations on the assessment and management of people with sesamoiditis.

Methods: A four-round online Delphi survey was conducted with a panel of New Zealand and Australian podiatrists. In the first round, panellists answered open-ended questions that were used to create statements. In round two, the panellists scored the statements from 1 to 9 (1 = not at all important, 9 = absolutely essential). Consensus was defined using the RAND/University of California Los Angles Disagreement Index. Panellists were asked to reconsider statements that did not achieve consensus in round three. In the final round, content validity and acceptability of the statements for inclusion in clinical recommendations were determined using content validity ratios and the Content Validity Index (CVI).

Results: Eighteen panellists completed round one with 16 (89%) completing all four rounds. A total of 118 statements were generated following round one. Following rounds two and three, 78 statements were accepted by panellists as being important, with 62 statements achieving sufficient content validity for inclusion in clinical recommendations. The CVI for these 62 statements was 0.58. These recommendations provide guidance on subjective assessment (pain characteristics/symptomology, activity/sports/training history and medical history) objective assessment (establishing a diagnosis, identifying contributing biomechanical factors, footwear/orthoses, ruling out differential diagnoses) and management (temporary padding/strapping, education, footwear, foot orthoses and when to consider referral).

Conclusion: This consensus exercise has provided a set of consensus-based recommendations for the assessment and management of people with sesamoiditis. In the current absence of research-based evidence in this area, these recommendations are intended to support clinicians. The recommendations may also serve as a basis for future clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of conservative interventions for people with sesamoiditis.