Diagnostic Criteria and Core Outcome Set Development for Necrotising Otitis Externa: the COSNOE Delphi Consensus Study

Sirat Lodhi,Emma Stapleton

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022215124000513

2024-04-24

The Journal of Laryngology & Otology

Abstract://static.cambridge.org/content/id/urn%3Acambridge.org%3Aid%3Aarticle%3AS0022215124000513/resource/name/firstPage-pdf-S0022215124000513a.jpg

otorhinolaryngology

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Research progress of core outcome sets in the emergency and critical care patients/

GAO Wen,JIN Jingfen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3761/j.issn.2096-7446.2023.03.017

2023-01-01

Abstract:There are various outcome indicators in clinical studies of acute and critical patients,which are difficult to integrate. The core outcome set（COS） refers to the standard set of clinical outcomes that should be measured and reported in clinical research. This article reviews the characteristics and content of developing COS. Multiple stakeholders such as physicians and nurses,patients and families should be involved during COS development. Outcomes such as physical function,neurological and psychological status,activity and participation,as well as society and environment should be involved. The construction of a COS for critically ill patients can provide a reference for standardizing nursing research design and promote the transformation and integration of nursing evidence,but the core index set needs to be further refined and improved.
Management and Outcomes of Necrotizing Otitis Externa: A Retrospective Cohort Study in a Tertiary Referral Center

Eleonora G M Vosbeek,Louise V Straatman,Arthur J A T Braat,Bart de Keizer,Hans G X M Thomeer,Adriana L Smit

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ONO.0000000000000042

2023-11-22

Abstract:Objectives: Necrotizing otitis externa (NOE) is a rare infection of the ear that causes osteomyelitis. We aimed to evaluate treatment outcomes and the role of imaging in diagnosing and monitoring disease resolution in a single-center study of patients with NOE. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, patients with NOE who were diagnosed and treated in a tertiary otology center in Utrecht, The Netherlands, between January 1, 2013 and August 1, 2022, were included. Data were retrieved from the medical records on demographics, symptoms, physical and diagnostic findings, type and duration of treatment, and course of disease. Results: A total of 24 cases were included. Patients were often elderly (mean age = 75 years) and diabetic (88%). Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the most commonly found microorganism (63%). Twenty-two cases (92%) received intravenous antibiotic treatment, and 7 cases (29%) received additional systemic antifungal treatment. The mean duration of systemic treatment was 29 weeks. In 20 out of 22 cases (91%), imaging was used to determine the end point of treatment. None of the cases with a total resolution of disease activity (n = 5) on 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography-computed tomography imaging at the time of cessation of therapy showed clinical relapse, compared with 1 out of 4 cases on gallium single-photon emission computerized tomography. Conclusion: Based on the experience from our center, we demonstrated that patients with NOE can successfully be treated with prolonged systemic treatment. Molecular imaging is reasonably successful for disease evaluation and decision-making on the eradication of disease.
Deciding treatment end point in necrotizing otitis externa: validation of a standardized clinical response assessment strategy with positron emission tomography findings

Sindhura Thanneru,Kapil Sikka,Ashu Seith Bhalla,Madhavi Tripathi,Alok Thakar,Anup Singh,Chirom Amit Singh,Hitesh Verma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-024-09006-z

2024-10-13

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

Abstract:Primary: To explore criteria for treatment endpoint in NOE. Secondary: To study correlation of inflammatory markers, Erythrocyte sedimentation Rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) with disease status.

otorhinolaryngology
A Core Outcome Set for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Development and Recommendations for Implementation in Clinical Practice Through an International Multi-stakeholder Consensus Process

Liselotte Fierens,Nicholas Carney,Gottfried Novacek,C Janneke van der Woude,Britta Siegmund,Francesc Casellas,Natalia Borruel,Anouk S Huberts,Elena Sonnenberg,Nathalie Gerold,Christian Primas,Charlotte R H Hedin,Tanja Stamm,Mette Julsgaard,Gionata Fiorino,Simona Radice,Michela Luciana Luisa Zini,Evelyn Gross,Cornelia Sander,Ingrid Arijs,Vasiliki-Rafaela Vakouftsi,Tunde Koltai,Health Outcomes Observatory H O Patient Advisory Board For Inflammatory Bowel Diseases,Health Outcomes Observatory H O Steering Committee,Iliàs Charlafti,Marc Ferrante

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjad195

2024-10-15

Abstract:Background and aims: Standardising health outcome measurements supports delivery of care and enables data-driven learning systems and secondary data use for research. As part of the Health Outcomes Observatory [H2O] initiative, and building on existing knowledge, a core outcome set [COS] for inflammatory bowel diseases [IBD] was defined through an international modified Delphi method. Methods: Stakeholders rated 90 variables on a 9-point importance scale twice, allowing score modification based on feedback displayed per stakeholder group. Two consecutive consensus meetings were held to discuss results and formulate recommendations for measurement in clinical practice. Variables scoring 7 or higher by ≥80% of the participants, or based on consensus meeting agreement, were included in the final set. Results: In total, 136 stakeholders (45 IBD patients [advocates], 74 health care professionals/researchers, 13 industry representatives, and four regulators) from 20 different countries participated. The final set includes 18 case-mix variables, three biomarkers [haemoglobin to detect anaemia, C-reactive protein and faecal calprotectin to detect inflammation] for completeness, and 28 outcomes (including 16 patient-reported outcomes [PROs] and one patient-reported experience). The PRO-2 and IBD-Control questionnaires were recommended to collect disease-specific PROs at every contact with an IBD practitioner, and the Subjective Health Experience model questionnaire, PROMIS Global Health and Self-Efficacy short form, to collect generic PROs annually. Conclusions: A COS for IBD, including a recommendation for use in clinical practice, was defined. Implementation of this set will start in Vienna, Berlin, Barcelona, Leuven, and Rotterdam, empowering patients to better manage their care. Additional centres will follow worldwide.
Diagnostic criteria and core outcome set development for necrotising otitis externa, symptomatic evaluation in patients awaiting septoplasty and early versus late tracheostomy in critically ill patients

Jonathan Fishman,Edward W Fisher

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022215124001543

2024-10-30

The Journal of Laryngology & Otology

Abstract:A tour de force article in this month's issue describes the development of standardised diagnostic criteria and a core outcome set for necrotising otitis externa, achieved using international best practice guidelines and incorporating patient and multidisciplinary stakeholder engagement. Reference Lodhi, Dodgson, Dykes, Vishwanath, Bazaz and Mathur 1 Adoption of these diagnostic criteria and the core outcome set should facilitate the optimisation of future necrotising otitis externa research through consistency in reporting and enhanced data synthesis, thereby enabling best practice to be identified. Nasal septoplasty is one of the most performed procedures within ENT. In a study by Williams et al . in this month's issue, patients on the waiting list for septoplasty and/or inferior turbinate reduction surgery were reviewed using a validated patient-reported outcome measure tool, the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation instrument, to assess symptom severity. Reference Williams, Chin Liu, Navaratnam and Ferguson 2 A pre-defined threshold of 30 or more on the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation scale was taken to warrant nasal surgery in patients with nasal airway obstruction secondary to a deviated nasal septum, based on the recently published Nasal Airways Obstruction Study trial. Reference Carrie, O'Hara, Fouweather, Homer, Rousseau and Rooshenas 3 The authors found that the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation questionnaire is a quick and simple way to evaluate, triage and prioritise patients on septoplasty waiting lists, helping to identify patients still requiring surgery. Other notable articles in this month's issue deserve special mention. The treatment of the clinically node-negative contralateral neck in patients with human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma remains controversial. An article in this month's issue analyses of the rate of contralateral nodal metastasis in HPV-associated oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, thereby helping to clarify which patient cohorts would benefit from bilateral neck treatment. Reference Kornfeld, Kyang, Taha, McCloy, Chin and Leavers 4 The contralateral nodal disease rate was 12.7 per cent, of which 2 per cent were occult findings. The most commonly involved contralateral nodal station was level II. The presence of extra-nodal extension and multiple ipsilateral positive nodes was associated with an increased risk of contralateral nodal disease. Finally, a manuscript in this month's issue adds to the growing body of literature examining the benefits of early versus late tracheostomy in critically ill patients, demonstrating an association of early tracheostomy with both shorter intensive care unit length of stay and lower mortality. Reference Patel, Patel, Revercomb, Cohen, Tseng and Hsueh 5

otorhinolaryngology
A Narrative Systematic Review and Categorisation of Outcomes in Inflammatory Bowel Disease to Inform a Core Outcome Set for Real-world Evidence

Charlotte Wong,Joep van Oostrom,Peter Bossuyt,Valerie Pittet,Jurij Hanzel,Mark Samaan,Monika Tripathi,Wladyslawa Czuber-Dochan,Johan Burisch,Salvatore Leone,Roberto Saldaña,Filip Baert,Uri Kopylov,Susanna Jaghult,Michel Adamina,Krisztina Gecse,Naila Arebi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjac057

2022-11-01

Abstract:Background: Heterogeneity exists in reported outcomes and outcome measurement instruments [OMI] from observational studies. A core outcome set [COS] for observational and real-world evidence [RWE] in inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] will facilitate pooling large datasets. This systematic review describes and classifies clinical and patient-reported outcomes, for COS development. Methods: The systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases identified observational studies published between 2000 and 2021 using the population exposure outcome [PEO] framework. Studies meeting eligibility criteria were included. After titles and abstracts screening, full-text articles were extracted by two independent reviewers. Primary and secondary outcomes with corresponding OMI were extracted and categorised in accordance with OMERACT Filter 2.1 framework. The frequency of outcomes and OMIs are described. Results: From 5854 studies, 315 were included: 129 [41%] Crohn's disease [CD], 60 [19%] ulcerative colitis [UC], and 126 [40%] inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] studies with 600 552 participants. Totals of 1632 outcomes and 1929 OMI were extracted mainly from medical therapy [181; 72%], surgical [34; 11%], and endoscopic [6; 2%] studies. Clinical and medical therapy-related safety were frequent outcome domains recorded in 194 and 100 studies. Medical therapy-related adverse events [n = 74] and need for surgery [n = 71] were the commonest outcomes. The most frequently reported OMI were patient or event numbers [n = 914], Harvey-Bradshaw Index [n = 45], and Montreal classification [n = 42]. Conclusions: There is substantial variability in outcomes reporting and OMI types. Categorised outcomes and OMI from this review will inform a Delphi consensus on a COS for future RWE in IBD. Data collection standardisation may enhance the quality of RWE applied to decision-making.
A core outcome set for post-COVID-19 condition in adults for use in clinical practice and research: an international Delphi consensus study

Daniel Munblit,Timothy Nicholson,Athena Akrami,Christian Apfelbacher,Jessica Chen,Wouter De Groote,Janet V Diaz,Sarah L Gorst,Nicola Harman,Alisa Kokorina,Piero Olliaro,Callum Parr,Jacobus Preller,Nicoline Schiess,Jochen Schmitt,Nina Seylanova,Frances Simpson,Allison Tong,Dale M Needham,Paula R Williamson,Alla Guekht,Malcolm “Calum” G. Semple,John O. Warner,Louise Sigfrid,Janet T. Scott,Audrey DunnGalvin,Jon Genuneit,Danilo Buonsenso,Manoj Sivan,Bob Siegerink,Frederikus A. Klok,Sergey Avdeev,Charitini Stavropoulou,Melina Michelen,Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi,Melanie Calvert,Sarah E. Hughes,Shamil Haroon,Laura Fregonese,Gail Carson,Samuel Knauss,Margaret O'Hara,John Marshall,Margaret Herridge,Srinivas Murthy,Theo Vos,Sarah Wulf Hanson,Ann Parker,Kelly K. O'Brien,Andrea Lerner,Jennifer R. Chevinsky,Elizabeth R. Unger,Robert W. Eisinger,Catherine L. Hough,Sharon Saydah,Jennifer A. Frontera,Regis Goulart Rosa,Bin Cao,Shinjini Bhatnagar,Ramachandran Thiruvengadam,Archana Seahwag,Anouar Bouraoui,Maria Van Kerkhove,Tarun Dua,Pryanka Relan,Juan Soriano Ortiz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s2213-2600(22)00169-2

IF: 102.642

2022-07-01

The Lancet Respiratory Medicine

Abstract:Health consequences that persist beyond the acute infection phase of COVID-19, termed post-COVID-19 condition (also commonly known as long COVID), vary widely and represent a growing global health challenge. Research on post-COVID-19 condition is expanding but, at present, no agreement exists on the health outcomes that should be measured in people living with the condition. To address this gap, we conducted an international consensus study, which included a comprehensive literature review and classification of outcomes for post-COVID-19 condition that informed a two-round online modified Delphi process followed by an online consensus meeting to finalise the core outcome set (COS). 1535 participants from 71 countries were involved, with 1148 individuals participating in both Delphi rounds. Eleven outcomes achieved consensus for inclusion in the final COS: fatigue; pain; post-exertion symptoms; work or occupational and study changes; survival; and functioning, symptoms, and conditions for each of cardiovascular, respiratory, nervous system, cognitive, mental health, and physical outcomes. Recovery was included a priori because it was a relevant outcome that was part of a previously published COS on COVID-19. The next step in this COS development exercise will be to establish the instruments that are most appropriate to measure these core outcomes. This international consensus-based COS should provide a framework for standardised assessment of adults with post-COVID-19 condition, aimed at facilitating clinical care and research worldwide.

respiratory system,critical care medicine
A Core Outcome Set for Research Evaluating Interventions to Enable Communication in Patients With an Artificial Airway: An International Delphi Consensus Study (Comm-COS)

Amy Freeman-Sanderson,Martin B Brodsky,Craig Dale,Anushua Gupta,Kimberley Haines,Mary Beth Happ,Nicholas Hart,Bronwyn Hemsley,Laura Istanboulian,Peter Spronk,Rebecca Sullivan,Anna-Liisa Sutt,Louise Rose

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000006347

2024-09-01

Abstract:Objectives: Critically ill adults requiring artificial airways experience profound communication deficits. Studies of interventions supporting communication report disparate outcomes, creating subsequent challenges in the interpretation of their effectiveness. Therefore, we aimed to develop international consensus for a communication core outcome set (Comm-COS) for future trials of communication interventions in this population. Design: 1) Systematic review, 2) patient/family interviews, 3) two-round modified Delphi, and 4) virtual consensus meetings with a final voting round. A multidisciplinary expert steering committee oversaw all stages. Setting: Interviews and consensus meetings were conducted via videoconferencing. Digital methods were used for Delphi and final Comm-COS voting. Subjects: Three stakeholder groups: 1) patient and family members with lived experience within 3 years, 2) clinicians with experience working in critical care, and 3) researchers publishing in the field. Intervention: None. Measurements and main results: We identified 59 outcomes via our systematic review, 3 unique outcomes from qualitative interviews, and 2 outcomes from our steering committee. Following item reduction, 32 outcomes were presented in Delphi round 1; 134 participants voted; 15 patient/family (11%), 91 clinicians (68%), and 28 researchers (21%). Nine additional outcomes were generated and added to round 2; 106 (81%) participants voted. Following completion of the consensus processes, the Comm-COS includes seven outcomes: 1) changes in emotions and wellbeing associated with ability to communicate, 2) physical impact of communication aid use, 3) time to functional communication, 4) ability to communicate healthcare needs (comfort/care/safety/decisions), 5) conversation agency, 6) ability to establish a communication connection to develop and maintain relationships, and 7) acceptability of the communication intervention. Conclusions: This is the first COS to specifically focus on communication for critically ill adults. Limitations for operationalization include selection of measures to use with these outcomes. Identification of suitable measures and adoption of the Comm-COS in future trials will help establish effective interventions to ameliorate the highly prevalent and negative experience of communicative incapacity.
A core outcome set for patient‐reported dysphagia for use in head and neck cancer clinical trials: An international multistakeholder Delphi study

Beatrice Manduchi,Margaret I. Fitch,Jolie G. Ringash,Doris Howell,Rosemary Martino

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.27626

2024-01-11

Head & Neck

Abstract:Background Measuring dysphagia‐related patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) in Head and Neck Cancer (HNC) patients is challenging due to dysphagia's multidimensional impact, causing inconsistency in outcome reporting. To address this issue, this study derived a consensus‐based core outcome set (COS) for patient‐reported dysphagia in HNC clinical trials where swallowing is a primary or secondary endpoint. Methods A sample of HNC clinicians, researchers, patients, and caregivers participated in a 2‐Round Delphi technique. A Delphi survey, containing a comprehensive list of dysphagia‐related PROs, was developed. In Round 1, participants rated item importance on a 5‐point scale. Items rated ≥4 by >70% advanced to Round 2, where a consensus meeting addressed items with varied opinions, and the Delphi survey with remaining items was completed. Items rated ≥4 by >70% formed the final COS. Results Forty‐five participants from nine countries were recruited. After Round 1, 40 items were excluded and 64 advanced to Round 2. After Round 2, a 7‐outcome COS was established, comprising the domains of dysphagia symptoms, health status and quality of life. Conclusion This study achieved consensus among HNC stakeholders on essential dysphagia PROs for HNC clinical trials. It is advisable to include these 7‐core concepts in clinical trials involving people with HNC to facilitate treatment comparisons and data synthesis.

surgery,otorhinolaryngology
Pediatric Necrotizing Otitis Externa: A Scoping Review

Zuhaib A. Khokhar,John F. Mills,Shaun A. Nguyen,David R. White,Wayne K. Robbins,Ted A. Meyer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00034894241280537

2024-09-19

Annals of Otology Rhinology & Laryngology

Abstract:Annals of Otology, Rhinology &Laryngology, Ahead of Print. Objective:This review sought to answer the following research question: What are the characteristics of pediatric necrotizing otitis externa (NOE)? Moreover, we wanted to highlight the clinical importance of the current limitations in the literature.Methods:A scoping review was performed to determine what is known about NOE in the pediatric population. Four databases (COCHRANE Library, CINAHL, PubMed, and Scopus) were queried for articles published in English between 1976 to 2022. Variables extracted included comorbidities, demographics, outcomes, and treatment.Results:A total of 20 studies (N = 439) reported sufficient measures to be included in the review. Patients with NOE had a mean age of 10.0 years (range 2 months to 14 years) with a male-to-female gender ratio of 1.1:1. Mean length of hospital stay was 2.9 days (95%CI: 2.7-3.0). Demographics included 45.4% Caucasian, 6.0% African American, and 2.7% Asian/Pacific Islander. Less than 5% of patients had diabetes, while other reported comorbidities included neutropenia (n = 6), anemia (n = 5), dehydration/malnutrition (n = 4), Stevens Johnson Syndrome (n = 2), some form of immunosuppression/organ transplantation (n = 2), thrombocytopenia (n = 2), and leukopenia (n = 2). There have been no reported deaths from NOE in children.Conclusions:In the adult population NOE most commonly affects patients with diabetes, but our review reveals that diabetes does not appear to play as big a role in children. The disease seems to commonly affect patients with immunosuppression or severe health conditions. Complications such as cranial nerve palsies appear to be more common in the pediatric population. Specifically, the role of biopsy and culture in the treatment of pediatric NOE is stressed as they are important in treatment decisions.

otorhinolaryngology
Core outcome measurement instruments for use in clinical and research settings for adults with post-COVID-19 condition: an international Delphi consensus study

Sarah L Gorst,Nina Seylanova,Susanna R Dodd,Nicola L Harman,Margaret O'Hara,Caroline B Terwee,Paula R Williamson,Dale M Needham,Daniel Munblit,Timothy R Nicholson,PC-COS study group,Olalekan L Aiyegbusi,Athena Akrami,Christian Apfelbacher,Melanie Calvert,Jessica Chen,Anastasia Chernyawskaya,Vicky Fallon,Shamil Haroon,Sarah E Hughes,Allison Jaure,Alisa Kokorinia,Melina Michelen,Piero Olliaro,Callum Parr,Alexandra Pokrovskaya,Nile Saunders,Jochen Schmitt,Ian Shemilt,Louise Sigfrid,Frances Simpson,Manoj Sivan,Charitini Stavropoulous

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(23)00370-3

Abstract:Post-COVID-19 condition (also known as long COVID) is a new, complex, and poorly understood disorder. A core outcome set (COS) for post-COVID-19 condition in adults has been developed and agreement is now required on the most appropriate measurement instruments for these core outcomes. We conducted an international consensus study involving multidisciplinary experts and people with lived experience of long COVID. The study comprised a literature review to identify measurement instruments for the core outcomes, a three-round online modified Delphi process, and an online consensus meeting to generate a core outcome measurement set (COMS). 594 individuals from 58 countries participated. The number of potential instruments for the 12 core outcomes was reduced from 319 to 19. Consensus was reached for inclusion of the modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale for respiratory outcomes. Measures for two relevant outcomes from a previously published COS for acute COVID-19 were also included: time until death, for survival, and the Recovery Scale for COVID-19, for recovery. Instruments were suggested for consideration for the remaining nine core outcomes: fatigue or exhaustion, pain, post-exertion symptoms, work or occupational and study changes, and cardiovascular, nervous system, cognitive, mental health, and physical outcomes; however, consensus was not achieved for instruments for these outcomes. The recommended COMS and instruments for consideration provide a foundation for the evaluation of post-COVID-19 condition in adults, which should help to optimise clinical care and accelerate research worldwide. Further assessment of this COMS is warranted as new data emerge on existing and novel measurement instruments.
Developing a core outcome set for the health outcomes for children and adults with congenital oesophageal atresia and/or tracheo-oesophageal fistula: OCELOT task group study protocol

Jonathan Ducey,Nick Lansdale,Sarah Gorst,Lucy Bray,Nadine Teunissen,Paul Cullis,Julia Faulkner,Victoria Gray,Lucia Gutierrez Gammino,Graham Slater,Laura Baird,Alex Adams,Julia Brendel,Adam Donne,Eniola Folaranmi,Laura Hopwood,Anna-May Long,Paul D Losty,Dan Benscoter,Corné de Vos,Sebastian King,Tom Kovesi,Usha Krishnan,Shireen A Nah,Lin Yin Ong,Mike Rutter,Warwick J Teague,Aaron M Zorn,Nigel J Hall,Rebecca Thursfield

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2023-002262

2024-02-05

Abstract:Introduction: Heterogeneity in reported outcomes of infants with oesophageal atresia (OA) with or without tracheo-oesophageal fistula (TOF) prevents effective data pooling. Core outcome sets (COS) have been developed for many conditions to standardise outcome reporting, facilitate meta-analysis and improve the relevance of research for patients and families. Our aim is to develop an internationally-agreed, comprehensive COS for OA-TOF, relevant from birth through to transition and adulthood. Methods and analysis: A long list of outcomes will be generated using (1) a systematic review of existing studies on OA-TOF and (2) qualitative research with children (patients), adults (patients) and families involving focus groups, semistructured interviews and self-reported outcome activity packs. A two-phase Delphi survey will then be completed by four key stakeholder groups: (1) patients (paediatric and adult); (2) families; (3) healthcare professionals; and (4) researchers. Phase I will include stakeholders individually rating the importance and relevance of each long-listed outcome using a 9-point Likert scale, with the option to suggest additional outcomes not already included. During phase II, stakeholders will review summarised results from phase I relative to their own initial score and then will be asked to rescore the outcome based on this information. Responses from phase II will be summarised using descriptive statistics and a predefined definition of consensus for inclusion or exclusion of outcomes. Following the Delphi process, stakeholder experts will be invited to review data at a consensus meeting and agree on a COS for OA-TOF. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval was sought through the Health Research Authority via the Integrated Research Application System, registration no. 297026. However, approval was deemed not to be required, so study sponsorship and oversight were provided by Alder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust. The study has been prospectively registered with the COMET Initiative. The study will be published in an open access forum.
Diagnosing odontogenic sinusitis: An international multidisciplinary consensus statement

John R. Craig,David M. Poetker,Umut Aksoy,Fabiana Allevi,Federico Biglioli,Bruce Y. Cha,Matteo Chiapasco,Jerome R. Lechien,Ahmad Safadi,Regimantas Simuntis,Roderick Tataryn,Tiziano Testori,Matthias Troeltzsch,Saulius Vaitkus,Hidenori Yokoi,Giovanni Felisati,Alberto M. Saibene

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/alr.22777

2021-02-14

Abstract:<section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Background</h3><p>Odontogenic sinusitis (ODS) is distinct from non‐odontogenic rhinosinusitis, and often requires multidisciplinary collaboration between otolaryngologists and dental providers to make the diagnosis. The purpose of this study was to develop international multidisciplinary consensus on diagnosing ODS.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Methods</h3><p>A modified Delphi method was used to assess for expert consensus on diagnosing bacterial ODS. A multidisciplinary panel of 17 authors with ODS expertise from 8 countries (8 otolaryngologists, 9 dental specialists) was assembled. Each author completed 2 of 3 surveys (2 specialty‐specific, and 1 for all authors). Thirty‐seven clinical statements were created, focusing on 4 important diagnostic components: suspecting ODS; confirming sinusitis in ODS; confirming different dental pathologies causing ODS; and multidisciplinary collaborative aspects of diagnosing ODS. Target audiences were all otolaryngologists and dental providers.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Results</h3><p>Of the 37 clinical statements, 36 reached consensus or strong consensus, and 1 reached no consensus. Strong consensus was reached that certain clinical and microbiologic features should arouse suspicion for ODS, and that multidisciplinary collaboration between otolaryngologists and dental providers is generally required to diagnose ODS. To diagnose ODS, otolaryngologists should confirm sinusitis mainly based on nasal endoscopic findings of middle meatal purulence, edema, or polyps, and dental providers should confirm dental pathology based on clinical examination and dental imaging.</p></section><section class="article-section__content"><h3 class="article-section__sub-title section1"> Conclusion</h3><p>Based on multidisciplinary international consensus, diagnosing ODS generally requires otolaryngologists to confirm sinusitis, and dental providers to confirm maxillary odontogenic pathology. Importantly, both dental providers and otolaryngologists should suspect ODS based on certain clinical features, and refer patients to appropriate providers for disease confirmation.</p></section>

otorhinolaryngology
Development of a core outcome set for use in research evaluations of interventions for venous leg ulceration: International eDelphi consensus

Sarah Hallas,E Andrea Nelson,Susan O'Meara,Georgina Gethin,steering group listed here:,Una Adderley,Pauline Meskell,Jane Nixon,Aonghus O'Loughlin,Sebastian Probst,Wael Tawfick,Thomas Wild

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtv.2024.02.006

Abstract:Introduction: Venous leg ulceration (VLU) is a chronic, recurring condition with associated pain, malodour, impaired mobility and susceptibility to infection which in turn significantly impacts an individual's health-related quality of life. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) aim to determine the efficacy of interventions to improve outcomes. To be useful, these outcomes should be consistently and fully reported across RCTs. A core outcome set (COS) is an agreed-upon standardised set of outcomes which should be, at a minimum, reported in all RCTs for a given indication including that of VLU. Aim: To gain consensus on which outcome domains and outcomes should be considered as core and therefore included in all RCTs of interventions in VLU treatment. Method: Two sequential, two round e-Delphi surveys were completed. The first gained consensus on core outcome domains and the second on core outcomes within those domains. Participants included: people with direct experience of having VLUs and their carers, healthcare professionals whose practice included VLU care and researchers within wound care (clinical, academic, industry). Results: Five outcome domains; healing, pain, quality of life, resource use and adverse events, and 11 outcomes were rated as core by participants. The patient and not the limb or ulcer was the preferred unit of analysis for reporting. Recommendations: We recommend investigators report on all five outcome domains, regardless of the type of intervention being evaluated. Future research is needed to identify measurement methods for the 11 identified outcomes. We also recommend investigators follow the CONSORT guidelines (http://www.consort-statement.org/).
Development of a core outcome set for breast cancer-related lymphedema: a Delphi study

David Doubblestein,Linda Koehler,Elizabeth Anderson,Nicole Scheiman,Paula Stewart,Mark Schaverien,Jane Armer

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-024-07262-5

2024-03-02

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Abstract:For breast cancer survivors (BCS) living with breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL), what outcome domains (OD) should be measured to assess the burden of the disease and efficacy of interventions? A Core Outcome Set (COS) that promotes standardized measurement of outcomes within the constraints of time influenced by work environments is essential for patients and the multidisciplinary professionals that manage and research BCRL.

oncology
Core outcomes in nerve surgery: development of a core outcome set for brachial plexus and upper extremity nerve injuries

Thomas J Wilson,Zarina S Ali,Gavin A Davis,Nora F Dengler,Ketan Desai,Debora Garozzo,Fernando Guedes,Megan M Jack,Line G Jacques,Thomas Kretschmer,Mark A Mahan,Rajiv Midha,Willem Pondaag,Ross C Puffer,Lukas Rasulić,Wilson Z Ray,Elias Rizk,Carlos A Rodriguez-Aceves,Yuval Shapira,Brandon W Smith,Mariano Socolovsky,Robert J Spinner,Eric L Zager

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3171/2023.11.JNS232272

2024-02-09

Abstract:Objective: When considering traumatic brachial plexus and upper extremity nerve injuries, iatrogenic nerve injuries, and nontraumatic nerve injuries, brachial plexus and upper extremity nerve injuries are commonly encountered in clinical practice. Despite this, data synthesis and comparison of available studies are difficult. This is at least in part due to the lack of standardization in reporting and a lack of a core outcome set (COS). Thus, there is a need for a COS for adult brachial plexus and upper extremity nerve injuries (COS-BPUE). The objective of this study was to develop a COS-BPUE using a modified Delphi approach. Methods: A 5-stage approach was used to develop the COS-BPUE: 1) consortium development, 2) literature review to identify potential outcome measures, 3) Delphi survey to develop consensus on outcomes for inclusion, 4) Delphi survey to develop definitions, and 5) consensus meeting to finalize the COS and definitions. The study followed the Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development (COS-STAD) recommendations. Results: The Core Outcomes in Nerve Surgery (COINS) Consortium comprised 23 participants, all neurological surgeons, representing 13 countries. The final COS-BPUE consisted of 36 data points/outcomes covering demographic, diagnostic, patient-reported outcome, motor/sensory outcome, and complication domains. Appropriate instruments, methods of testing, and definitions were set. The consensus minimum duration of follow-up was 24 months, with the consensus optimal time points for assessment being preoperatively and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Conclusions: The COINS Consortium developed a consensus COS and provided definitions, methods of implementation, and time points for assessment. The COS-BPUE should serve as a minimum set of data that should be collected in all future neurosurgical studies on adult brachial plexus and upper extremity nerve injuries. Incorporation of this COS should help improve consistency in reporting, data synthesis, and comparability, and should minimize outcome reporting bias.
Protocol of a scoping review of outcome domains in dermatology

Nadir,U.,Ahmed,A.,Yi,M. D.,Hisham,F. I.,Dave,L.,Kottner,J.,Ezzedine,K.,Garg,A.,Ingram,J. R.,Jemec,G. B. E.,Spuls,P. I.,Kirkham,J. J.,Cahn,B.,Alam,M.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079632

IF: 3.006

2024-02-07

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction Core outcome sets (COSs) are agreed outcomes (domains (subdomains) and instruments) that should be measured as a minimum in clinical trials or practice in certain diseases or clinical fields. Worldwide, the number of COSs is increasing and there might be conceptual overlaps of domains (subdomains) and instruments within disciplines. The aim of this scoping review is to map and to classify all outcomes identified with COS projects relating to skin diseases. Methods and analysis We will conduct a scoping review of outcomes of skin disease-related COS initiatives to identify all concepts and their definitions. We will search PubMed, Embase and Cochrane library. The search dates will be 1 January 2010 (the point at which Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) was established) to 1 January 2024. We will also review the COMET database and C3 website to identify parts of COSs (domains and/or instruments) that are being developed and published. This review will be supplemented by querying relevant stakeholders from COS organisations, dermatology organisations and patient organisations for additional COSs that were developed. The resulting long lists of outcomes will then be mapped into conceptually similar concepts. Ethics and dissemination This study was supported by departmental research funds from the Department of Dermatology at Northwestern University. An ethics committee review was waived since this protocol was done by staff researchers with no involvement of patient care. Conflicts of interests, if any, will be addressed by replacing participants with relevant conflicts or reassigning them. The results will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals, social media posts and promotion by COS organisations.

medicine, general & internal
Core outcome set for studies evaluating interventions to prevent or treat delirium in long-term care older residents: international key stakeholder informed consensus study

Gregor Russell,Namrata Rana,Siobhan T Reilly,Anas Shehadeh,Valerie Page,Najma Siddiqi,Louise Rose

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afae227

2024-10-27

Age and Ageing

Abstract:Trials of interventions to prevent or treat delirium in older adults resident in long-term care settings (LTC) report heterogenous outcomes, hampering the identification of effective management strategies for this important condition. Our objective was to develop international consensus among key stakeholders for a core outcome set (COS) for future trials of interventions to prevent and/or treat delirium in this population. We used a rigorous COS development process including qualitative interviews with family members and staff with experience of delirium in LTC; a modified two-round Delphi survey; and virtual consensus meetings using nominal group technique. The study was registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) initiative (https://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/796). Item generation identified 22 delirium-specific outcomes and 32 other outcomes from 18 qualitative interviews. When combined with outcomes identified in our earlier systematic review, and following an item reduction step, this gave 43 outcomes that advanced to the formal consensus processes. These involved 169 participants from 12 countries, and included healthcare professionals (121, 72%), researchers (24, 14%), and family members/people with experience of delirium (24, 14%). Six outcomes were identified as essential to include in all trials of interventions for delirium in LTC, and were therefore included in the COS. These are: 'delirium occurrence'; 'delirium related distress'; 'delirium severity'; 'cognition including memory', 'admission to hospital' and 'mortality'. This COS, endorsed by the American Delirium Society and the European and Australasian Delirium Associations, is recommended for use in future clinical trials evaluating delirium prevention or treatment interventions for older adults residing in LTC.

geriatrics & gerontology,gerontology
Core outcome set in paediatric sepsis in low- and middle-income countries: a study protocol

Gavin Wooldridge,Srinivas Murthy,Niranjan Kissoon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034960

IF: 3.006

2020-04-06

BMJ Open

Abstract:Introduction: Sepsis is the leading cause of death in children worldwide and has recently been declared a major global health issue. New interventions and a concerted effort to enhance our understanding of sepsis are required to address the huge burden of disease, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) where it is highest. An opportunity therefore exists to ensure that ongoing research in this area is relevant to all stakeholders and is of consistently high quality. One method to address these issues is through the development of a core outcome set (COS). Methods and analysis: This study protocol outlines the phases in the development of a core outcome set for paediatric sepsis in LMIC. The first step involves performing a systematic review of all outcomes reported in the research of paediatric sepsis in low middle-income countries. A three-stage international Delphi process will then invite a broad range of participants to score each generated outcome for inclusion into the COS. This will include an initial two-step online survey and finally, a face-to-face consensus meeting where each outcome will be reviewed, voted on and ratified for inclusion into the COS. Ethics and dissemination: No core outcome sets exist for clinical trials in paediatric sepsis. This COS will serve to not only highlight the heavy burden of paediatric sepsis in this setting and aid collaboration and participation between all stakeholders, but to promote ongoing essential high quality and relevant research into the topic. A COS in paediatric sepsis in LMIC will advocate for a common language and facilitate interpretation of findings from a variety of settings. A waiver for ethics approval has been granted by University of British Columbia Children's and Women's Research Ethics Board.
Core outcome measurement set for research and clinical practice in post-COVID-19 condition (long COVID) in children and young people: an international Delphi consensus study "PC-COS Children"

Nina Seylanova,Anastasia Chernyavskaya,Natalia Degtyareva,Aigun Mursalova,Ali Ajam,Lin Xiao,Khazhar Aktulaeva,Philipp Roshchin,Polina Bobkova,Olalekan Lee Aiyegbusi,Anbarasu Theodore Anbu,Christian Apfelbacher,Ali Akbar Asadi-Pooya,Liat Ashkenazi-Hoffnung,Caroline Brackel,Danilo Buonsenso,Wouter de Groote,Janet V Diaz,Daniele Dona,Audrey Dunn Galvin,Jon Genuneit,Helen Goss,Sarah E Hughes,Christina J Jones,Krutika Kuppalli,Laura A Malone,Sammie McFarland,Dale M Needham,Nikita Nekliudov,Timothy R Nicholson,Carlos R Oliveira,Nicoline Schiess,Terry Y Segal,Louise Sigfrid,Claire Thorne,Susanne Vijverberg,John O Warner,Wilson Milton Were,Paula R Williamson,Daniel Munblit,PC-COS Children Study Group,Asiah Kassim,Jennifer R Chevinsky,Karen Choong,Rae Duncan,Susanna Esposito,Rebecca Foster,Alla Guekht,Allison Jaure,Carrie Mackenzie,Vivienne Matthies-Bonn,Karen Matvienko-Sikar,Lorraine McCloud,Donna C McParland,Victor Daniel Miron,Srinivas Murthy,Sarah O Connel,Margaret O'Hara,Anna Ogonowska-Slodownik,Jana Pavare,Paula Robertson,Jeremy Rossman,Oana Săndulescu,Sharon H Saydah,Jochen Schmitt,Malcolm Calum G Semple,Roz Shafran,Ausra Snipaitiene,Arne Søraas,Terence Stephenson,Lola Tulen,Gonzalo Valenzuela Galaz,David Vickers,Daniel Christian Vilser,Michaela Waak,Julie Wells,Elizabeth Whittaker,Michelle Winer,Alan Asmanov,Pasquale Comberiati

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.01761-2023

2024-03-14

Abstract:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic substantially impacted different age groups, with children and young people not exempted. Many have experienced enduring health consequences. Presently, there is no consensus on the health outcomes to assess in children and young people with post-COVID-19 condition. Furthermore, it is unclear which measurement instruments are appropriate for use in research and clinical management of children and young people with post-COVID-19. To address these unmet needs, we conducted a consensus study, aiming to develop a core outcome set (COS) and an associated core outcome measurement set (COMS) for evaluating post-COVID-19 condition in children and young people. Our methodology comprised of two phases. In phase 1 (to create a COS), we performed an extensive literature review and categorisation of outcomes, and prioritised those outcomes in a two-round online modified Delphi process followed by a consensus meeting. In phase 2 (to create the COMS), we performed another modified Delphi consensus process to evaluate measurement instruments for previously defined core outcomes from phase 1, followed by an online consensus workshop to finalise recommendations regarding the most appropriate instruments for each core outcome. In phase 1, 214 participants from 37 countries participated, with 154 (72%) contributing to both Delphi rounds. The subsequent online consensus meeting resulted in a final COS which encompassed seven critical outcomes: fatigue; post-exertion symptoms; work/occupational and study changes; as well as functional changes, symptoms, and conditions relating to cardiovascular, neuro-cognitive, gastrointestinal and physical outcomes. In phase 2, 11 international experts were involved in a modified Delphi process, selecting measurement instruments for a subsequent online consensus workshop where 30 voting participants discussed and independently scored the selected instruments. As a result of this consensus process, four instruments met a priori consensus criteria for inclusion: PedsQL multidimensional fatigue scale for "fatigue"; PedsQL gastrointestinal symptom scales for "gastrointestinal"; PedsQL cognitive functioning scale for "neurocognitive" and EQ-5D for "physical functioning". Despite proposing outcome measurement instruments for the remaining three core outcomes ("cardiovascular", "post-exertional malaise", "work/occupational and study changes"), a consensus was not achieved. Our international, consensus-based initiative presents a robust framework for evaluating post-COVID-19 condition in children and young people in research and clinical practice via a rigorously defined COS and associated COMS. It will aid in the uniform measurement and reporting of relevant health outcomes worldwide.

Diagnostic Criteria and Core Outcome Set Development for Necrotising Otitis Externa: the COSNOE Delphi Consensus Study

Research progress of core outcome sets in the emergency and critical care patients/

Management and Outcomes of Necrotizing Otitis Externa: A Retrospective Cohort Study in a Tertiary Referral Center

Deciding treatment end point in necrotizing otitis externa: validation of a standardized clinical response assessment strategy with positron emission tomography findings

A Core Outcome Set for Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: Development and Recommendations for Implementation in Clinical Practice Through an International Multi-stakeholder Consensus Process

Diagnostic criteria and core outcome set development for necrotising otitis externa, symptomatic evaluation in patients awaiting septoplasty and early versus late tracheostomy in critically ill patients

A Narrative Systematic Review and Categorisation of Outcomes in Inflammatory Bowel Disease to Inform a Core Outcome Set for Real-world Evidence

A core outcome set for post-COVID-19 condition in adults for use in clinical practice and research: an international Delphi consensus study

A Core Outcome Set for Research Evaluating Interventions to Enable Communication in Patients With an Artificial Airway: An International Delphi Consensus Study (Comm-COS)

A core outcome set for patient‐reported dysphagia for use in head and neck cancer clinical trials: An international multistakeholder Delphi study

Pediatric Necrotizing Otitis Externa: A Scoping Review

Core outcome measurement instruments for use in clinical and research settings for adults with post-COVID-19 condition: an international Delphi consensus study

Developing a core outcome set for the health outcomes for children and adults with congenital oesophageal atresia and/or tracheo-oesophageal fistula: OCELOT task group study protocol

Diagnosing odontogenic sinusitis: An international multidisciplinary consensus statement

Development of a core outcome set for use in research evaluations of interventions for venous leg ulceration: International eDelphi consensus

Development of a core outcome set for breast cancer-related lymphedema: a Delphi study

Core outcomes in nerve surgery: development of a core outcome set for brachial plexus and upper extremity nerve injuries

Protocol of a scoping review of outcome domains in dermatology

Core outcome set for studies evaluating interventions to prevent or treat delirium in long-term care older residents: international key stakeholder informed consensus study

Core outcome set in paediatric sepsis in low- and middle-income countries: a study protocol

Core outcome measurement set for research and clinical practice in post-COVID-19 condition (long COVID) in children and young people: an international Delphi consensus study "PC-COS Children"