Dataset Information

Expert Consensus on Morphofunctional Assessment in Disease-Related Malnutrition. Grade Review and Delphi Study.

ABSTRACT: Disease-related malnutrition (DRM) affects approximately a third of hospitalized patients and is associated with an increased risk of morbimortality. However, DRM is often underdiagnosed and undertreated. Our aim is to evaluate the prognostic value of morphofunctional tools and tests for nutritional assessment in clinical practice. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies relating to the morphofunctional assessment of nutritional status and mortality or complications. Evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) method. Twelve GRADE recommendations were made and divided into seven topics: food intake and nutrient assimilation, anthropometry, biochemical analysis, hand grip strength, phase angle, muscle imaging, and functional status and quality of life. From these recommendations, 37 statements were developed and scored in a two-survey Delphi method by 183 experts. A consensus was reached on accepting 26/37 statements. Surveys had high internal consistency and high inter-rater reliability. In conclusion, evidence-based recommendations were made on the prognostic value of morphofunctional assessment tools and tests to assess malnutrition, most of which were found to be feasible in routine clinical practice, according to expert opinions.

SUBMITTER: Garcia-Almeida JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9920608 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Expert Consensus on Morphofunctional Assessment in Disease-Related Malnutrition. Grade Review and Delphi Study.

García-Almeida José Manuel JM García-García Cristina C Ballesteros-Pomar María D MD Olveira Gabriel G Lopez-Gomez Juan J JJ Bellido Virginia V Bretón Lesmes Irene I Burgos Rosa R Sanz-Paris Alejandro A Matia-Martin Pilar P Botella Romero Francisco F Ocon Breton Julia J Zugasti Murillo Ana A Bellido Diego D

Nutrients 20230125 3

Disease-related malnutrition (DRM) affects approximately a third of hospitalized patients and is associated with an increased risk of morbimortality. However, DRM is often underdiagnosed and undertreated. Our aim is to evaluate the prognostic value of morphofunctional tools and tests for nutritional assessment in clinical practice. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify studies relating to the morphofunctional assessment of nutritional status and mortality or complications. Evi ...[more]

PMID: 36771319

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDelirium, a common occurrence in clinical work, can be divided into three subtypes according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5 th Edition (DSM-5). Each subtype has its special significance and focus. As the primary caregivers and observer of delirious patients, nurses should be able to quickly and accurately indentify each subtype. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify nurses' assessment ability of delirium subtypes. However, there is currently no suitable questionnaire available for investigating nurses' assessment ability of delirium subtypes.ObjectiveTo develop a scientifically validated questionnaire for assessing nursing assessment ability of delirium subtypes based on Knowledge-Attitude-Practice(KAP) Model.MethodsThe questionnaire was conducted from October 2021 to February 2022 to assess the KAP status of nurses the regarding delirium subtype. A two-round Delphi Method was employed to revise the draft questionnaire, ensuring the importance and rationality of each item. Ten experts specializing in critically ill patients, clinical nursing, and nursing management were invited from seven provinces in China for the Delphi process. Additionally, we validated the reliability and validity of the questionnaire.ResultsThe return rate in the first and second rounds were 83% and 100%, respectively. The individual authority coefficients for the two rounds of correspondence ranged from 0.787 to 0.987, while the overall authority coefficient of experts was 0.866. Kendall's coefficient of coordination for the importance scores were found to be 0.192 and 0.156, respectively, whereas those for rationality scores were calculated as 0.149 and 0.141, respectively. Notably, all mean values of importance and rationality scores in the two rounds were exceeded a threshold of 4.10 across both rounds of assessment with coefficient variations (CV) ranging from 0.00 to 0.19 for importance ratings and 0.00 to 0.16 for rationality ratings, both of which were <0.25. Experts proposed modifications to eleven items while introducing four new ones into consideration during this process; thus ensuring that reliability and validity standards were met by the final questionnaire design which consists of a total of thirty-seven items distributed across four dimensions: delirium subtype-related knowledge, assessment attitude, assessment practice, and knowledge source-thereby establishing its clinical relevance as a reliable scientific instrument.ConclusionThe development process is both scientific and theoretical, encompassing reliable expert correspondence results and a diverse range of question formats. As thus, effectively captures the current landscape of delirium subtypes assessment among clinical nurses from multiple perspectives, including knowledge level and source, attitude, assessment behavior, and assessment barriers. It offers comprehensive and detailed insights.

Project description:BackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused unprecedented pressure on healthcare system globally. Lack of high-quality evidence on the respiratory management of COVID-19-related acute respiratory failure (C-ARF) has resulted in wide variation in clinical practice.MethodsUsing a Delphi process, an international panel of 39 experts developed clinical practice statements on the respiratory management of C-ARF in areas where evidence is absent or limited. Agreement was defined as achieved when > 70% experts voted for a given option on the Likert scale statement or > 80% voted for a particular option in multiple-choice questions. Stability was assessed between the two concluding rounds for each statement, using the non-parametric Chi-square (χ2) test (p < 0·05 was considered as unstable).ResultsAgreement was achieved for 27 (73%) management strategies which were then used to develop expert clinical practice statements. Experts agreed that COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is clinically similar to other forms of ARDS. The Delphi process yielded strong suggestions for use of systemic corticosteroids for critical COVID-19; awake self-proning to improve oxygenation and high flow nasal oxygen to potentially reduce tracheal intubation; non-invasive ventilation for patients with mixed hypoxemic-hypercapnic respiratory failure; tracheal intubation for poor mentation, hemodynamic instability or severe hypoxemia; closed suction systems; lung protective ventilation; prone ventilation (for 16-24 h per day) to improve oxygenation; neuromuscular blocking agents for patient-ventilator dyssynchrony; avoiding delay in extubation for the risk of reintubation; and similar timing of tracheostomy as in non-COVID-19 patients. There was no agreement on positive end expiratory pressure titration or the choice of personal protective equipment.ConclusionUsing a Delphi method, an agreement among experts was reached for 27 statements from which 20 expert clinical practice statements were derived on the respiratory management of C-ARF, addressing important decisions for patient management in areas where evidence is either absent or limited.Trial registrationThe study was registered with Clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT04534569.

Project description:Antidote stocking represents a major challenge to hospitals all over the world, including Kuwait. In order to assist hospitals to reduce costs and improve patient care, an essential antidote list can be used as an initial foundation for securing sufficient antidote availability at healthcare institutions. The aim of our study is to generate a nationally relevant essential antidote list for emergency care hospitals in Kuwait using the e-Delphi method by establishing consensus through a multidisciplinary expert group of healthcare providers. An electronic survey with 47 essential antidotes was developed. The e-Delphi method was used, with three rounds of voting, to determine expert consensus on an essential antidote list for hospitals in Kuwait. A purposive sample of healthcare professionals from governmental and private hospitals were selected for this study (n = 30). Consensus was gained if ≥75% of the expert panel agreed on the inclusion of the antidote, without any strong disagreements. Round 1 of the e-Delphi resulted in 41 antidotes reaching consensus and seven new antidotes suggested by the expert panel. Round 2 had two antidotes (out of seven newly suggested ones) reaching consensus. Round 3 was a confirmatory round, where the expert group agreed on their previous rounds' opinions. This resulted in the development of an essential antidote list with 43 antidotes. The optimal approach for ensuring adequate availability of antidotes is continuous monitoring of local poisoning incidence and antidote requirements through collaborations between academic researchers and emergency care clinicians. The development of an essential antidote list, with expert consensus, is one of the initial steps in securing a foundation for appropriate provision of antidotes at all healthcare institutions. This is the first study that the authors are aware of that demonstrates that the e-Delphi technique can consolidate recommendations of experts in emergency medicine to provide a list of essential antidotes.

Project description:AimsThere is considerable controversy regarding optimal management of patients with paraesophageal hiatus hernia (pHH). This survey aims at identifying recommended strategies for work-up, surgical therapy, and postoperative follow-up using Delphi methodology.MethodsWe conducted a 2-round, 33-question, web-based Delphi survey on perioperative management (preoperative work-up, surgical procedure and follow-up) of non-revisional, elective pHH among European surgeons with expertise in upper-GI. Responses were graded on a 5-point Likert scale and analyzed using descriptive statistics. Items from the questionnaire were defined as "recommended" or "discouraged" if positive or negative concordance among participants was > 75%. Items with lower concordance levels were labelled "acceptable" (neither recommended nor discouraged).ResultsSeventy-two surgeons with a median (IQR) experience of 23 (14-30) years from 17 European countries participated (response rate 60%). The annual median (IQR) individual and institutional caseload was 25 (15-36) and 40 (28-60) pHH-surgeries, respectively. After Delphi round 2, "recommended" strategies were defined for preoperative work-up (endoscopy), indication for surgery (typical symptoms and/or chronic anemia), surgical dissection (hernia sac dissection and resection, preservation of the vagal nerves, crural fascia and pleura, resection of retrocardial lipoma) and reconstruction (posterior crurorrhaphy with single stitches, lower esophageal sphincter augmentation (Nissen or Toupet), and postoperative follow-up (contrast radiography). In addition, we identified "discouraged" strategies for preoperative work-up (endosonography), and surgical reconstruction (crurorrhaphy with running sutures, tension-free hiatus repair with mesh only). In contrast, many items from the questionnaire including most details of mesh augmentation (indication, material, shape, placement, and fixation technique) were "acceptable".ConclusionsThis multinational European Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process to identify recommended strategies for the management of pHH. Our work may be useful in clinical practice to guide the diagnostic process, increase procedural consistency and standardization, and to foster collaborative research.

Dataset Information

Expert Consensus on Morphofunctional Assessment in Disease-Related Malnutrition. Grade Review and Delphi Study.

Publications

Expert Consensus on Morphofunctional Assessment in Disease-Related Malnutrition. Grade Review and Delphi Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets