Wilson M Roy, Lee Paul P, Weinreb Robert N, Lee Brian L, Singh Kuldev
University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA.
Am J Ophthalmol. 2008 Mar;145(3):570-574. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.10.019. Epub 2008 Jan 11.
To examine ways to improve existing methodology to reach appropriate consensus in the treatment of primary open-angle glaucoma.
Evidence-based literature and accumulated expert opinion.
A core nonvoting steering committee composed of four individuals created 148 statements. Another nonvoting individual with expertise in clinical epidemiology reviewed all evidence in support of or against each statement and summarized this information. After review of these summaries, 10 panelists voted on each of the statements both before and after a panel meeting where each question was discussed by the panel. The polling was conducted online using a customized software program for the process.
Consensus was reached on most statements both before and after the panel meeting. The proportion of questions where consensus agreement or disagreement was reached increased from 82 of 148 before the panel meeting to 110 of 148 after the meeting. Detailed information regarding the results of the polling are provided in the accompanying article.(1)
Refinements to existing descriptions of modified RAND-like appropriateness methodology was successful in allowing a group of ophthalmology panelists to reach consensus for or against most statements developed by nonpanelists. Future studies should be conducted to compare how robust and valid this methodology is as compared with other methods of determining optimal clinical care decision making.
探讨改进现有方法以在原发性开角型青光眼治疗中达成适当共识的途径。
循证文献及积累的专家意见。
由四人组成的核心无投票权指导委员会拟定了148条陈述。另一位具有临床流行病学专业知识的无投票权人员审查了支持或反对每条陈述的所有证据,并对这些信息进行了总结。在审查这些总结之后,10名小组成员在小组会议讨论每个问题之前和之后对每条陈述进行投票。投票通过为此过程定制的软件程序在线进行。
小组会议前后,大多数陈述都达成了共识。达成共识同意或不同意的问题比例从小组会议前148条中的82条增加到会议后的148条中的110条。随附文章提供了有关投票结果的详细信息。(1)
对现有的类似兰德的适当性方法描述进行改进,成功地使一组眼科专家小组成员就非小组成员拟定的大多数陈述达成了支持或反对的共识。未来应开展研究,比较该方法与其他确定最佳临床护理决策方法相比的稳健性和有效性。