Dataset Information

Identifying the Most Important Confounders When Assessing the Association Between Low-Grade Systemic Inflammation and Musculoskeletal Pain: A Modified Delphi Study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The association between low-grade systemic inflammation and musculoskeletal pain may be influenced by multiple factors. However, little is known about the relative importance of these factors, and few studies account for them. This Delphi study aimed to reach consensus on the most important confounders which influence the association between low-grade systemic inflammation and musculoskeletal pain.

Methods

The panel consisted of 48 experts. In Round 1, the experts proposed what they believed were important confounders. In Round 2, the experts indicated for each confounder whether they believed it was important (yes/no). At least 50% of experts had to indicate the confounder was important to be considered in the final round. In Round 3, the experts rated the importance of each confounder on a 7-point Likert scale. Consensus was reached if ≥75% of the experts considered the factor either extremely or moderately important.

Results

In Round 1, 120 confounders were proposed, which were synthesized into 38 distinct factors. In Round 2, 33 confounders met the criterion to be considered important. In Round 3, consensus was reached for 14 confounders: acute illness/trauma, immune disease, medication use, endocrine, nutritional, or metabolic disease, other musculoskeletal conditions, age, handling of blood samples, sex, cancer, body composition, pregnancy, cardiovascular disease, physical activity, and pain characteristics.

Conclusions

These findings provide insight in the complexity of the association between low-grade systemic inflammation and musculoskeletal pain. Some factors currently listed as confounders may be re-classified as moderators or mediators as insights progress.

SUBMITTER: Koop MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8633774 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Identifying the Most Important Confounders When Assessing the Association Between Low-Grade Systemic Inflammation and Musculoskeletal Pain: A Modified Delphi Study.

Koop Meghan A MA Lutke Schipholt Ivo J IJ Scholten-Peeters Gwendolyne G M GGM Coppieters Michel W MW

Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.) 20211101 11

<h4>Objective</h4>The association between low-grade systemic inflammation and musculoskeletal pain may be influenced by multiple factors. However, little is known about the relative importance of these factors, and few studies account for them. This Delphi study aimed to reach consensus on the most important confounders which influence the association between low-grade systemic inflammation and musculoskeletal pain.<h4>Methods</h4>The panel consisted of 48 experts. In Round 1, the experts propos ...[more]

PMID: 34343332

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundOptimal shaping of contextual factors (CFs) during clinical encounters may be associated with analgesic responses in treatments for musculoskeletal pain. These CFs (i.e., the patient-practitioner relationship, patient's and practitioner's beliefs/characteristics, treatment characteristics, and environment) have not been widely evaluated by musculoskeletal practitioners. Understanding their views has the potential to improve treatment quality and effectiveness. Drawing on a panel of United Kingdom practitioners' expertise, this study aimed to investigate their perceptions of CFs during the management of patients presenting with chronic low back pain (LBP).MethodsA modified two-round online Delphi-consensus survey was conducted to measure the extent of panel agreement regarding the perceived acceptability and influence of five main types of CFs during clinical management of patients with chronic LBP. Qualified musculoskeletal practitioners in the United Kingdom providing regular treatment for patients with chronic LBP were invited to take part.ResultsThe successive Delphi rounds included 39 and 23 panellists with an average of 19.9 and 21.3 years of clinical experience respectively. The panel demonstrated a high degree of consensus regarding approaches to enhance the patient-practitioner relationship (18/19 statements); leverage their own characteristics/beliefs (10/11 statements); modify the patient's beliefs and consider patient's characteristics (21/25 statements) to influence patient outcomes during chronic LBP rehabilitation. There was a lower degree of consensus regarding the influence and use of approaches related to the treatment characteristics (6/12 statements) and treatment environment (3/7 statements), and these CFs were viewed as the least important. The patient-practitioner relationship was rated as the most important CF, although the panel were not entirely confident in managing a range of patients' cognitive and emotional needs.ConclusionThis Delphi study provides initial insights regarding a panel of musculoskeletal practitioners' attitudes towards CFs during chronic LBP rehabilitation in the United Kingdom. All five CF domains were perceived as capable of influencing patient outcomes, with the patient-practitioner relationship being perceived as the most important CF during routine clinical practice. Musculoskeletal practitioners may require further training to enhance their proficiency and confidence in applying essential psychosocial skills to address the complex needs of patients with chronic LBP.

Project description:ObjectiveTo identify primary care structures and processes that have the highest and lowest impact on chronic disease management and screening and prevention outcomes as well as to assess the feasibility of implementing these structures and processes into practice.DesignA two-round Delphi study was conducted to establish consensus on the impact and feasibility of 258 primary care structures and processes.Participants29 primary care providers, health system leaders and health services researchers in the USA.OutcomesPrimary outcomes were (1) consensus on the impact of each structure and process on chronic disease management and screening and prevention outcomes, separately and (2) consensus on feasibility of implementation by primary care practices.ResultsConsensus on high impact and feasibility of implementation was reached on four items for chronic disease management: 'Providers use motivational interviewing to help patients set goals', 'Practice has designated staff to manage patient panel', 'Practice has onsite providers or staff that speak the most dominant, non-English language spoken by patients' and 'Practice includes mental health providers and/or behavioural health specialists in care team' and seven items for screening and prevention: 'Practice utilizes standing protocols and orders', 'Practice generates reports to alert clinicians to missed targets and to identify gaps in care, such as overdue visits, needed vaccinations, screenings or other preventive services', 'Practice has designated staff to manage patient panel', 'Practice sets performance goals and uses benchmarking to track quality of care', 'Practice uses performance feedback to identify practice-specific areas of improvement', 'Practice builds quality improvement activities into practice operations' and 'Pre-visit planning data are reviewed during daily huddles'. Only 'Practice has designated staff to manage patient panel' appeared on both lists.ConclusionFindings suggest that practices need to focus on implementing mostly distinct, rather than common, structures and processes to optimise chronic disease and preventive care.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough Sri Lankan medical students need to acquire specific procedural skills during their undergraduate training, agreement on what skills they should obtain is inconclusive. This study aimed to generate consensus of the expert panel on essential procedural skills and level of expertise to be attained for Sri Lankan medical students and need for developing and implementing a pre-clerkship procedural training curriculum to improve procedural expertise.MethodsA three-round online modified Delphi study was conducted between August 2022 and January 2023. The initial questionnaire was developed from existing student logbooks and published literature. Round one invited the expert panel to rate their agreement on the inclusion of essential procedures for undergraduate medical training. In Round two, the panel rated their expectation of procedural expertise for a medical graduate on the first day of internship (ie, Observer to Proficient). Round three established the consensus on the need for a pre-clerkship procedural curriculum.ResultsThe expert panel included 17 clinicians involved in undergraduate medical education and supervision of intern medical doctors. In Round 1, they rated their agreement on including teaching of 64 procedures and suggested four additional procedures. In Round 2, experts re-appraised 33 items and rated the level of procedural expertise. In Round 3, experts re-appraised the ratings of 14 essential procedures and rated the support for a pre-clerkship procedural curriculum for medical students. Consensus defined as > 75% agreement was established with 35 essential procedural skills. Most of the experts expressed the need for a pre-clerkship procedural curriculum for medical students.ConclusionsThrough three rounds of modified Delphi, the current study established 35 procedural skills essential for a Sri Lankan medical graduate. The results also support the need for developing and implementing a pre-clerkship procedural training curriculum to improve procedural expertise of graduating doctors which demonstrate the importance of aligning existing medical curricula with competency-based medical education.

Project description:BackgroundTelehealth has emerged as an alternative model for treatment delivery and has become an important component of health service delivery. However, there is inconsistency in the use of terminologies and a lack of research priorities in telehealth in musculoskeletal pain. The purpose of this international, multidisciplinary expert panel assembled in a modified three-round e-Delphi survey is to achieve a consensus on research priorities and for the standard terminology for musculoskeletal pain telehealth practice.MethodsIn this international modified e-Delphi survey, we invited an expert panel consisting of researchers, clinicians, consumer representatives, industry partners, healthcare managers, and policymakers to participate in a three-round e-Delphi. Expert panels were identified through the Expertscape website, PubMed database, social media, and a snowball approach. In Round 1, potential research priorities and terminologies were presented to panel members. Panel members rated the agreement of each research priority on a 5-point Likert scale and an 11-point numerical scale, and each terminology on a 5-point Likert scale for the "telehealth in musculoskeletal pain " field over rounds. At least 80% of the panel members were required to agree to be deemed a consensus. We analyzed the data descriptively and assessed the stability of the results using the Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed rank test.ResultsWe performed an international e-Delphi survey from February to August 2022. Of 694 invited people, 160 panel members participated in the first round, 133 in the second round (83% retention), and 134 in the third round (84% retention). Most of the panel members were researchers 76 (47%), clinicians 57 (36%), and consumer representatives 9 (6%) of both genders especially from Brazil 31 (19%), India 22 (14%), and Australia 19 (12%) in the first round. The panel identified fourteen telehealth research priorities spanned topics including the development of strategies using information and communication technology, telehealth implementation services, the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telehealth interventions, equity of telehealth interventions, qualitative research and eHealth literacy in musculoskeletal pain conditions from an initial list of 20 research priorities. The consensus was reached for "digital health" and "telehealth" as standard terminologies from an initial list of 37 terminologies.ConclusionAn international, multidisciplinary expert consensus recommends that future research should consider the 14 research priorities for telehealth musculoskeletal pain reached. Additionally, the terms digital health and telehealth as the most appropriate terminologies to be used in musculoskeletal telehealth research.RegisterOpen Science Framework ( https://osf.io/tqmz2/ ).

Dataset Information

Identifying the Most Important Confounders When Assessing the Association Between Low-Grade Systemic Inflammation and Musculoskeletal Pain: A Modified Delphi Study.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Identifying the Most Important Confounders When Assessing the Association Between Low-Grade Systemic Inflammation and Musculoskeletal Pain: A Modified Delphi Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets