肺癌(基于互联网)德尔菲(LUCiD):修改后的 eDelphi 共识流程,用于制定澳大利亚胸腔癌临床质量指标。

IF 6.6 2区 医学 Q1 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Respirology Pub Date : 2024-12-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-13 DOI:10.1111/resp.14812
Jessica Nash, Emily Stone, Shalini Vinod, Tracy Leong, Paul Dawkins, Rob G Stirling, Susan Harden, Alison Bolton, Annette McWilliams, Kenneth O'Byrne, Gavin M Wright, Vanessa N Brunelli, Tracey Guan, Shoni Philpot, Neal Navani, Fraser Brims
{"title":"肺癌(基于互联网)德尔菲(LUCiD):修改后的 eDelphi 共识流程,用于制定澳大利亚胸腔癌临床质量指标。","authors":"Jessica Nash, Emily Stone, Shalini Vinod, Tracy Leong, Paul Dawkins, Rob G Stirling, Susan Harden, Alison Bolton, Annette McWilliams, Kenneth O'Byrne, Gavin M Wright, Vanessa N Brunelli, Tracey Guan, Shoni Philpot, Neal Navani, Fraser Brims","doi":"10.1111/resp.14812","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Approximately 16,000 new cases of lung cancer are diagnosed each year in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, and it is the leading cause of cancer death in the region. Unwarranted variation in lung cancer care and outcomes has been described for many years, although clinical quality indicators to facilitate benchmarking across Australasia have not been established. The purpose of this study was to establish clinical quality indicators applicable to lung and other thoracic cancers across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following a literature review, a modified three round eDelphi consensus process was completed between October 2022 and June 2023. Participants included clinicians from all relevant disciplines, patient advocates, researchers and other stakeholders, with representatives from all Australian states and territories and Aotearoa New Zealand. Consensus was set at a threshold of 70%, with the first two rounds conducted as online surveys, and the final round held as a hybrid in person and virtual consensus meeting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The literature review identified 422 international thoracic oncology indicators, and a total of 71 indicators were evaluated over the course of the Delphi consensus. Ultimately, 27 clinical quality indicators reached consensus, covering the continuum of thoracic oncologic care from diagnosis to first line treatment. Indicators benchmarking supportive care were poorly represented. Attendant numeric quality standards were developed to facilitate benchmarking.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Twenty-seven clinical quality indicators relevant to thoracic oncology care in Australasia were developed. Real world implementation will now be explored utilizing a prospective dataset collected across Australia.</p>","PeriodicalId":21129,"journal":{"name":"Respirology","volume":" ","pages":"1085-1094"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lung cancer (internet-based) Delphi (LUCiD): A modified eDelphi consensus process to establish Australasian clinical quality indicators for thoracic cancer.\",\"authors\":\"Jessica Nash, Emily Stone, Shalini Vinod, Tracy Leong, Paul Dawkins, Rob G Stirling, Susan Harden, Alison Bolton, Annette McWilliams, Kenneth O'Byrne, Gavin M Wright, Vanessa N Brunelli, Tracey Guan, Shoni Philpot, Neal Navani, Fraser Brims\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/resp.14812\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>Approximately 16,000 new cases of lung cancer are diagnosed each year in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, and it is the leading cause of cancer death in the region. Unwarranted variation in lung cancer care and outcomes has been described for many years, although clinical quality indicators to facilitate benchmarking across Australasia have not been established. The purpose of this study was to establish clinical quality indicators applicable to lung and other thoracic cancers across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following a literature review, a modified three round eDelphi consensus process was completed between October 2022 and June 2023. Participants included clinicians from all relevant disciplines, patient advocates, researchers and other stakeholders, with representatives from all Australian states and territories and Aotearoa New Zealand. Consensus was set at a threshold of 70%, with the first two rounds conducted as online surveys, and the final round held as a hybrid in person and virtual consensus meeting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The literature review identified 422 international thoracic oncology indicators, and a total of 71 indicators were evaluated over the course of the Delphi consensus. Ultimately, 27 clinical quality indicators reached consensus, covering the continuum of thoracic oncologic care from diagnosis to first line treatment. Indicators benchmarking supportive care were poorly represented. Attendant numeric quality standards were developed to facilitate benchmarking.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Twenty-seven clinical quality indicators relevant to thoracic oncology care in Australasia were developed. Real world implementation will now be explored utilizing a prospective dataset collected across Australia.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Respirology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1085-1094\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Respirology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"88\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.14812\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/13 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respirology","FirstCategoryId":"88","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.14812","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:澳大利亚和新西兰每年新确诊约 16,000 例肺癌患者,肺癌是该地区癌症死亡的主要原因。多年来,人们一直在描述肺癌治疗和预后的不合理差异,但尚未建立起便于在整个澳大拉西亚地区进行基准比较的临床质量指标。本研究旨在建立适用于澳大利亚和新西兰奥特亚罗瓦地区肺癌和其他胸部癌症的临床质量指标:方法:在文献综述之后,于 2022 年 10 月至 2023 年 6 月期间完成了修改后的三轮 eDelphi 共识流程。参与者包括所有相关学科的临床医生、患者权益倡导者、研究人员和其他利益相关者,代表来自澳大利亚各州、领地和新西兰奥特亚罗瓦。共识的临界值设定为 70%,前两轮以在线调查的形式进行,最后一轮以现场和虚拟混合共识会议的形式举行:结果:文献综述确定了 422 项国际胸部肿瘤指标,德尔菲共识会议共评估了 71 项指标。最终,27 项临床质量指标达成共识,涵盖了从诊断到一线治疗的整个胸部肿瘤治疗过程。支持性护理基准指标的代表性较差。为了便于制定基准,我们制定了相应的数字质量标准:结论:制定了 27 项与澳大拉西亚胸部肿瘤治疗相关的临床质量指标。现在,我们将利用在澳大利亚收集的前瞻性数据集来探索实际应用情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Lung cancer (internet-based) Delphi (LUCiD): A modified eDelphi consensus process to establish Australasian clinical quality indicators for thoracic cancer.

Background and objective: Approximately 16,000 new cases of lung cancer are diagnosed each year in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, and it is the leading cause of cancer death in the region. Unwarranted variation in lung cancer care and outcomes has been described for many years, although clinical quality indicators to facilitate benchmarking across Australasia have not been established. The purpose of this study was to establish clinical quality indicators applicable to lung and other thoracic cancers across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.

Methods: Following a literature review, a modified three round eDelphi consensus process was completed between October 2022 and June 2023. Participants included clinicians from all relevant disciplines, patient advocates, researchers and other stakeholders, with representatives from all Australian states and territories and Aotearoa New Zealand. Consensus was set at a threshold of 70%, with the first two rounds conducted as online surveys, and the final round held as a hybrid in person and virtual consensus meeting.

Results: The literature review identified 422 international thoracic oncology indicators, and a total of 71 indicators were evaluated over the course of the Delphi consensus. Ultimately, 27 clinical quality indicators reached consensus, covering the continuum of thoracic oncologic care from diagnosis to first line treatment. Indicators benchmarking supportive care were poorly represented. Attendant numeric quality standards were developed to facilitate benchmarking.

Conclusion: Twenty-seven clinical quality indicators relevant to thoracic oncology care in Australasia were developed. Real world implementation will now be explored utilizing a prospective dataset collected across Australia.

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
Respirology
Respirology 医学-呼吸系统
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
5.80%
发文量
225
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Respirology is a journal of international standing, publishing peer-reviewed articles of scientific excellence in clinical and clinically-relevant experimental respiratory biology and disease. Fields of research include immunology, intensive and critical care, epidemiology, cell and molecular biology, pathology, pharmacology, physiology, paediatric respiratory medicine, clinical trials, interventional pulmonology and thoracic surgery. The Journal aims to encourage the international exchange of results and publishes papers in the following categories: Original Articles, Editorials, Reviews, and Correspondences. Respirology is the preferred journal of the Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand, has been adopted as the preferred English journal of the Japanese Respiratory Society and the Taiwan Society of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine and is an official journal of the World Association for Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology.
×
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