Matteo Luigi Giuseppe Leoni, Felice Occhigrossi, Michael Tenti, William Raffaeli
{"title":"内窥镜表皮剥脱术治疗慢性脊柱疼痛：基于德尔菲法的意大利专家共识。","authors":"Matteo Luigi Giuseppe Leoni, Felice Occhigrossi, Michael Tenti, William Raffaeli","doi":"10.1007/s40122-024-00695-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Endoscopic epidurolysis (EE) is a minimally invasive procedure used to manage chronic spinal pain, particularly in cases unresponsive to traditional treatments. Despite its growing recognition, the literature lacks comprehensive guidelines on its optimal use. This study utilized a modified Delphi approach to gather expert consensus on best practices for EE in the Italian pain therapy network.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study's scientific board conducted an extensive literature review to define key investigation topics, including clinical indications, preoperative assessments, and technical aspects of EE. A semi-structured questionnaire was developed and administered to a panel of experts. A two-round Delphi process was implemented, with consensus defined as at least 70% agreement on a 7-point Likert scale (agree or strongly agree). Statements that did not reach consensus in the first round were rephrased and resubmitted in the second round.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six clinicians participated in the study, with a 100% response rate in both rounds. In the first round, consensus was achieved for 9 out of 19 statements. In the second round, 8 out of 10 rephrased statements reached the consensus threshold. Key areas of agreement included the clinical indications for EE, the importance of preoperative imaging and anesthetic assessments, and the use of specific techniques and tools for EE. However, consensus was not reached on the use of EE for disc herniation with radicular pain and the safety of interlaminar access compared to sacral hiatus access.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study highlights the need for standardized protocols in EE to ensure consistent and effective treatment of chronic spinal pain. The consensus reached by the expert panel provides a framework for best practices, which can guide clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes. Further research is necessary to validate these findings and address areas where consensus was not achieved.</p>","PeriodicalId":19908,"journal":{"name":"Pain and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"339-357"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11751267/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endoscopic Epidurolysis for the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: A Delphi-Based Italian Experts Consensus.\",\"authors\":\"Matteo Luigi Giuseppe Leoni, Felice Occhigrossi, Michael Tenti, William Raffaeli\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40122-024-00695-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Endoscopic epidurolysis (EE) is a minimally invasive procedure used to manage chronic spinal pain, particularly in cases unresponsive to traditional treatments. Despite its growing recognition, the literature lacks comprehensive guidelines on its optimal use. This study utilized a modified Delphi approach to gather expert consensus on best practices for EE in the Italian pain therapy network.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study's scientific board conducted an extensive literature review to define key investigation topics, including clinical indications, preoperative assessments, and technical aspects of EE. A semi-structured questionnaire was developed and administered to a panel of experts. A two-round Delphi process was implemented, with consensus defined as at least 70% agreement on a 7-point Likert scale (agree or strongly agree). Statements that did not reach consensus in the first round were rephrased and resubmitted in the second round.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six clinicians participated in the study, with a 100% response rate in both rounds. In the first round, consensus was achieved for 9 out of 19 statements. In the second round, 8 out of 10 rephrased statements reached the consensus threshold. Key areas of agreement included the clinical indications for EE, the importance of preoperative imaging and anesthetic assessments, and the use of specific techniques and tools for EE. However, consensus was not reached on the use of EE for disc herniation with radicular pain and the safety of interlaminar access compared to sacral hiatus access.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study highlights the need for standardized protocols in EE to ensure consistent and effective treatment of chronic spinal pain. The consensus reached by the expert panel provides a framework for best practices, which can guide clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes. Further research is necessary to validate these findings and address areas where consensus was not achieved.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pain and Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"339-357\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11751267/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pain and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-024-00695-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40122-024-00695-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Endoscopic Epidurolysis for the Management of Chronic Spinal Pain: A Delphi-Based Italian Experts Consensus.
Introduction: Endoscopic epidurolysis (EE) is a minimally invasive procedure used to manage chronic spinal pain, particularly in cases unresponsive to traditional treatments. Despite its growing recognition, the literature lacks comprehensive guidelines on its optimal use. This study utilized a modified Delphi approach to gather expert consensus on best practices for EE in the Italian pain therapy network.
Methods: The study's scientific board conducted an extensive literature review to define key investigation topics, including clinical indications, preoperative assessments, and technical aspects of EE. A semi-structured questionnaire was developed and administered to a panel of experts. A two-round Delphi process was implemented, with consensus defined as at least 70% agreement on a 7-point Likert scale (agree or strongly agree). Statements that did not reach consensus in the first round were rephrased and resubmitted in the second round.
Results: Twenty-six clinicians participated in the study, with a 100% response rate in both rounds. In the first round, consensus was achieved for 9 out of 19 statements. In the second round, 8 out of 10 rephrased statements reached the consensus threshold. Key areas of agreement included the clinical indications for EE, the importance of preoperative imaging and anesthetic assessments, and the use of specific techniques and tools for EE. However, consensus was not reached on the use of EE for disc herniation with radicular pain and the safety of interlaminar access compared to sacral hiatus access.
Conclusion: The study highlights the need for standardized protocols in EE to ensure consistent and effective treatment of chronic spinal pain. The consensus reached by the expert panel provides a framework for best practices, which can guide clinical decision-making and improve patient outcomes. Further research is necessary to validate these findings and address areas where consensus was not achieved.
期刊介绍：
Pain and Therapy is an international, open access, peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal dedicated to the publication of high-quality clinical (all phases), observational, real-world, and health outcomes research around the discovery, development, and use of pain therapies and pain-related devices. Studies relating to diagnosis, pharmacoeconomics, public health, quality of life, and patient care, management, and education are also encouraged.
Areas of focus include, but are not limited to, acute pain, cancer pain, chronic pain, headache and migraine, neuropathic pain, opioids, palliative care and pain ethics, peri- and post-operative pain as well as rheumatic pain and fibromyalgia.
The journal is of interest to a broad audience of pharmaceutical and healthcare professionals and publishes original research, reviews, case reports, trial protocols, short communications such as commentaries and editorials, and letters. The journal is read by a global audience and receives submissions from around the world. Pain and Therapy will consider all scientifically sound research be it positive, confirmatory or negative data. Submissions are welcomed whether they relate to an international and/or a country-specific audience, something that is crucially important when researchers are trying to target more specific patient populations. This inclusive approach allows the journal to assist in the dissemination of all scientifically and ethically sound research.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
