Dataset Information

Developing Consensus on Clinical Outcomes for Children with Mild Pneumonia: A Delphi Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The absence of consensus for outcomes in pediatric antibiotic trials is a major barrier to research harmonization and clinical translation. We sought to develop expert consensus on study outcomes for clinical trials of children with mild community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).

Methods

Applying the Delphi method, a multispecialty expert panel ranked the importance of various components of clinical response and treatment failure outcomes in children with mild CAP for use in research. During Round 1, panelists suggested additional outcomes in open-ended responses that were added to subsequent rounds of consensus building. For Rounds 2 and 3, panelists were provided their own prior responses and summary statistics for each item in the previous round. The consensus was defined by >70% agreement.

Results

The expert panel determined that response to and failure of treatment should be addressed at a median of 3 days after initiation. Complete or substantial improvement in fever, work of breathing, dyspnea, tachypnea when afebrile, oral intake, and activity should be included as components of adequate clinical response outcomes. Clinical signs and symptoms including persistent or worsening fever, work of breathing, and reduced oral intake should be included in treatment failure outcomes. Interventions including receipt of parenteral fluids, supplemental oxygen, need for high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy, and change in prescription of antibiotics should also be considered in treatment failure outcomes.

Conclusions

Clinical response and treatment failure outcomes determined by the consensus of this multidisciplinary expert panel can be used for pediatric CAP studies to provide objective data translatable to clinical practice.

SUBMITTER: Florin TA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9969329 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Developing Consensus on Clinical Outcomes for Children with Mild Pneumonia: A Delphi Study.

Florin Todd A TA Melnikow Joy J Gosdin Melissa M Ciuffetelli Ryan R Benedetti Jillian J Ballard Dustin D Gausche-Hill Marianne M Kronman Matthew P MP Martin Lisa A LA Mistry Rakesh D RD Neuman Mark I MI Palazzi Debra L DL Patel Sameer J SJ Self Wesley H WH Shah Samir S SS Shah Sonal N SN Sirota Susan S Cruz Andrea T AT Ruddy Richard R Gerber Jeffrey S JS Kuppermann Nathan N

Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society 20230201 2

<h4>Background</h4>The absence of consensus for outcomes in pediatric antibiotic trials is a major barrier to research harmonization and clinical translation. We sought to develop expert consensus on study outcomes for clinical trials of children with mild community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).<h4>Methods</h4>Applying the Delphi method, a multispecialty expert panel ranked the importance of various components of clinical response and treatment failure outcomes in children with mild CAP for use in r ...[more]

PMID: 36625856

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Information to be included in advance informed consent forms for health care-associated pneumonia treatment trials remains to be determined. Objective:To identify and determine how to describe information to be included in an advance informed consent form for an early-enrollment noninferiority hospital-acquired and/or ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants:A Delphi consensus process with stakeholders in HABP/VABP clinical trials was conducted using qualitative semistructured telephone interviews from June to August 2016, followed by 2 online surveys, the first from April to May 2017, and the second from September to October 2017. All stakeholders who participated in the interview were invited to participate in the first survey. Stakeholders who participated in the first survey were invited to participate in the second survey. Stakeholders were patients at risk of pneumonia, caregivers, representatives of institutional review boards, investigators, and study coordinators. Main Outcomes and Measures:Description and consensus of information to be included in advance informed consent forms for early enrollment in noninferiority HABP/VABP clinical trials. Results:Suggestions from 52 stakeholders about what key informed consent concepts to include and how to explain them were used to create 3 categories to be included in an advance consent form: (1) reassurances on patient health and treatment, (2) rationale for advance consent and early enrollment, and (3) an explanation of noninferiority. At the end of the Delphi process, at least 80% consensus was reached among the 40 stakeholders who participated in the second online survey on each of the statements to include in the proposed consent text. Throughout the process, however, describing and reaching consensus on statements about noninferiority was more problematic than the other categories. Conclusions and Relevance:The stakeholders endorsed consent language to be used in combination with a strategy for enrolling patients at highest risk for pneumonia before infection onset. Data-driven consent language may help potential participants make informed decisions about their involvement in clinical research and improve enrollment rates, which are necessary to evaluate new treatments and improve patient care. The proposed consent language may be adapted for other trials using an early enrollment strategy and for noninferiority trials.

Project description:BackgroundThis study presents a framework for determining the allocation and distribution of the limited amount of vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2).MethodsAfter analyzing the pandemic strategies of the major organizations and countries and with a literature review conducted by a core panel, a modified Delphi survey was administered to 13 experts in the fields of vaccination, infectious disease, and public health in the Republic of Korea. The following topics were discussed: 1) identifying the objectives of the vaccination strategy, 2) identifying allocation criteria, and 3) establishing a step-by-step vaccination framework and prioritization strategy based on the allocation criteria. Two rounds of surveys were conducted for each topic, with a structured questionnaire provided via e-mail in the first round. After analyzing the responses, a meeting with the experts was held to obtain consensus on how to prioritize the population groups.ResultsThe first objective of the vaccination strategy was maintenance of the integrity of the healthcare system and critical infrastructure, followed by reduction of morbidity and mortality and reduction of community transmission. In the initial phase, older adult residents in care homes, high-risk health and social care workers, and personal support workers who work in direct contact with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients would be prioritized. Expansion of vaccine supply would allow immunization of older adults not included in phase 1, followed by healthcare workers not previously included and individuals with comorbidities. Further widespread vaccine supply would ensure availability to the extended adult age groups (50-64 years old), critical workers outside the health sector, residents who cannot socially distance, and, eventually, the remaining populations.ConclusionThis survey provides the much needed insight into the decision-making process for vaccine allocation at the national level. However, flexibility in adapting to strategies will be essential, as new information is constantly emerging.

Project description:ObjectiveThe appropriate management of patients with Dravet Syndrome (DS) is challenging, given the severity of symptoms and the burden of the disease for patients and caregivers. This study aimed to identify, through a qualitative methodology and a Delphi consensus-driven process, a set of recommendations for the management of DS to guide clinicians in the assessment of the clinical condition and quality of life (QoL) of DS patients, with a special focus on patient- and caregiver-reported outcomes (PROs).MethodsThis study was conducted in five phases, led by a multidisciplinary scientific committee (SC) including pediatric neurologists, epileptologists, a neuropsychologist, an epilepsy nurse, and members of DS patient advocates. In phases 1 and 2, a questionnaire related to patients' QoL was prepared and answered by caregivers and the SC. In phase 3, the SC generated, based on these answers and on a focus group discussion, a 70-item Delphi questionnaire, covering six topic categories on a nine-point Likert scale. In phase 4, 32 panelists, from different Spanish institutions and with a multidisciplinary background, answered the questionnaire. Consensus was obtained and defined as strong or moderate if ≥80% and 67-79% of panelists, respectively, rated the statement with ≥7. Phase 5 consisted of the preparation of the manuscript.ResultsThe panelists agreed on a total of 69 items (98.6%), 54 (77.14%), and 15 (21.43%) with strong and moderate consensus, respectively. The experts' recommendations included the need for frequent assessment of patient and caregivers QoL parameters. The experts agreed that QoL should be assessed through specific questionnaires covering different domains. Likewise, the results showed consensus regarding the regular evaluation of several clinical parameters related to neurodevelopment, attention, behavior, other comorbidities, and sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP). A consensus was also reached on the instruments, specific parameters, and caregivers' education in the routine clinical management of patients with DS.ConclusionsThis consensus resulted in a set of recommendations for the assessment of clinical and QoL parameters, including PROs, related to the general evaluation of QoL, neurodevelopment, attention, behavior, other comorbidities affecting QoL, SUDEP, and QoL of caregivers/relatives and patients with DS.

Dataset Information

Developing Consensus on Clinical Outcomes for Children with Mild Pneumonia: A Delphi Study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Developing Consensus on Clinical Outcomes for Children with Mild Pneumonia: A Delphi Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets