确定哪些与干针疗法相关的不良事件应纳入知情同意书:修改后的 e-Delphi 研究。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 REHABILITATION
Physiotherapy Theory and Practice Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-09 DOI:10.1080/09593985.2023.2208668
Edmund C Ickert, David Griswold, Ken Learman, Chad Cook
{"title":"确定哪些与干针疗法相关的不良事件应纳入知情同意书:修改后的 e-Delphi 研究。","authors":"Edmund C Ickert, David Griswold, Ken Learman, Chad Cook","doi":"10.1080/09593985.2023.2208668","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Dry needling (DN) uses a monofilament needle to reduce pain and is performed by various healthcare professions. Due to the invasive needle puncture, adverse events (AEs) have been associated with DN. It is unclear, which AEs should be included in a risk statement for Informed Consent (IC). The purpose of this study was to identify which AEs should be included in a risk statement for IC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A three-round e-Delphi study was undertaken using a panel of DN experts. Expert inclusion criteria included: (1) ≥5 years practice performing DN and one of the following secondary criteria: (A) certification in DN; (B) completion of a manual therapy fellowship that included DN training; or (C) ≥1 publication involving the use of DN. Participants rated their level of agreement using a 4-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as either: 1) ≥80% agreement; or 2) ≥70% and <80% agreement with median ≥3, interquartile range ≤1, and standard deviation ≤1.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 14 (28%) AEs achieved final consensus in Round 3 for inclusion on IC. Kendall's Coefficient (<i>w</i>) of agreement for Round 2 was 0.213 and improved to 0.349 after Round 3. Wilcoxon rank tests revealed statistically significant changes for 12 of the 50 AEs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Consensus was attained for 14 AEs for inclusion on IC. The AEs identified can be used for the development of a shorter, more concise IC risk statement. A total of 93.6% of experts agreed on definitions for AE classification.</p>","PeriodicalId":48699,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying which adverse events associated with dry needling should be included for informed consent: A modified e-Delphi study.\",\"authors\":\"Edmund C Ickert, David Griswold, Ken Learman, Chad Cook\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09593985.2023.2208668\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Dry needling (DN) uses a monofilament needle to reduce pain and is performed by various healthcare professions. Due to the invasive needle puncture, adverse events (AEs) have been associated with DN. It is unclear, which AEs should be included in a risk statement for Informed Consent (IC). The purpose of this study was to identify which AEs should be included in a risk statement for IC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A three-round e-Delphi study was undertaken using a panel of DN experts. Expert inclusion criteria included: (1) ≥5 years practice performing DN and one of the following secondary criteria: (A) certification in DN; (B) completion of a manual therapy fellowship that included DN training; or (C) ≥1 publication involving the use of DN. Participants rated their level of agreement using a 4-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as either: 1) ≥80% agreement; or 2) ≥70% and <80% agreement with median ≥3, interquartile range ≤1, and standard deviation ≤1.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 14 (28%) AEs achieved final consensus in Round 3 for inclusion on IC. Kendall's Coefficient (<i>w</i>) of agreement for Round 2 was 0.213 and improved to 0.349 after Round 3. Wilcoxon rank tests revealed statistically significant changes for 12 of the 50 AEs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Consensus was attained for 14 AEs for inclusion on IC. The AEs identified can be used for the development of a shorter, more concise IC risk statement. A total of 93.6% of experts agreed on definitions for AE classification.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48699,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2023.2208668\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Theory and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2023.2208668","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:干针疗法(DN)使用单丝针来减轻疼痛,由不同的医疗保健专业人员实施。由于针刺具有创伤性,干针疗法已经出现了相关的不良事件(AEs)。目前尚不清楚哪些不良事件应纳入知情同意书(IC)的风险声明中。本研究旨在确定哪些不良事件应纳入知情同意书的风险声明中:方法:使用 DN 专家小组进行了三轮 e-Delphi 研究。专家纳入标准包括(1) 从事 DN 工作≥5 年,并符合以下次要标准之一:(A) 获得 DN 认证;(B) 完成包括 DN 培训在内的徒手治疗研究;或 (C) ≥1 篇涉及 DN 使用的出版物。参与者使用 4 点李克特量表评定其同意程度。共识的定义是1) 一致度≥80%;或 2) 一致度≥70%:在第三轮中,共有 14 项(28%)AE 达成最终共识,被纳入 IC。第二轮的肯德尔系数(w)为 0.213,第三轮后提高到 0.349。Wilcoxon 秩 序检验显示,在 50 项预期成果中,有 12 项在统计学上有显著变化:结论:在将 14 种预期成果纳入集成电路方面已达成共识。所确定的 AE 可用于制定更简短、更简明的 IC 风险声明。共有 93.6% 的专家就 AE 分类的定义达成了一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Identifying which adverse events associated with dry needling should be included for informed consent: A modified e-Delphi study.

Objective: Dry needling (DN) uses a monofilament needle to reduce pain and is performed by various healthcare professions. Due to the invasive needle puncture, adverse events (AEs) have been associated with DN. It is unclear, which AEs should be included in a risk statement for Informed Consent (IC). The purpose of this study was to identify which AEs should be included in a risk statement for IC.

Methods: A three-round e-Delphi study was undertaken using a panel of DN experts. Expert inclusion criteria included: (1) ≥5 years practice performing DN and one of the following secondary criteria: (A) certification in DN; (B) completion of a manual therapy fellowship that included DN training; or (C) ≥1 publication involving the use of DN. Participants rated their level of agreement using a 4-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as either: 1) ≥80% agreement; or 2) ≥70% and <80% agreement with median ≥3, interquartile range ≤1, and standard deviation ≤1.

Results: A total of 14 (28%) AEs achieved final consensus in Round 3 for inclusion on IC. Kendall's Coefficient (w) of agreement for Round 2 was 0.213 and improved to 0.349 after Round 3. Wilcoxon rank tests revealed statistically significant changes for 12 of the 50 AEs.

Conclusion: Consensus was attained for 14 AEs for inclusion on IC. The AEs identified can be used for the development of a shorter, more concise IC risk statement. A total of 93.6% of experts agreed on definitions for AE classification.

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
3.40
自引率
10.00%
发文量
300
期刊介绍: The aim of Physiotherapy Theory and Practice is to provide an international, peer-reviewed forum for the publication, dissemination, and discussion of recent developments and current research in physiotherapy/physical therapy. The journal accepts original quantitative and qualitative research reports, theoretical papers, systematic literature reviews, clinical case reports, and technical clinical notes. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice; promotes post-basic education through reports, reviews, and updates on all aspects of physiotherapy and specialties relating to clinical physiotherapy.
×
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