Practical Considerations in Using Online Modified-Delphi Approaches to Engage Patients and Other Stakeholders in Clinical Practice Guideline Development

Overview

Journal Patient

Specialty Health Services

Date 2019 Sep 24

PMID 31544219

Citations 42

Authors

Dmitry Khodyakov

Sean Grant

Brian Denger

Kathi Kinnett

Ann Martin

Holly Peay

Ian Coulter

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Patients and caregivers are increasingly recognized as key stakeholders in developing clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). Online engagement approaches offer the promise of a rigorous, scalable, and convenient engagement method. This paper illustrates how an online modified-Delphi approach could be used to engage patients, caregivers, and other stakeholder in CPG development. It provides practical guidance for conducting online modified-Delphi panels that covers (1) joint development of the engagement approach with relevant stakeholders, (2) adaptation of methods used by experts in guideline development, (3) pilot testing, (4) participant recruitment, (5) determining panel size and composition, (6) building participant capacity, (7) facilitation of two-way interaction, (8) continuous engagement and retention of participants, (9) rigorous data analysis, (10) evaluation of engagement activities, and (11) result dissemination. The paper is based on a recently completed study about engaging individuals with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) and their caregivers in determining the patient-centeredness of DMD care guidelines.

Citing Articles

Removing barriers to management of adults with type 2 diabetes on insulin using continuous glucose monitoring in UK primary care practice: An expert consensus.

Seidu S, Avery L, Bell H, Brown P, Diggle J, Down S Diabet Med. 2024; 42(3):e15500.

PMID: 39676327 PMC: 11823331. DOI: 10.1111/dme.15500.

Implementation science research priorities for Universal Health Coverage: methodological lessons from the design and implementation of a multicountry modified Delphi study.

Wodnik B, Namyalo P, Michaelides O, Essue B, Kane S, Di Ruggiero E Health Policy Plan. 2024; 40(3):422-427.

PMID: 39658269 PMC: 11886793. DOI: 10.1093/heapol/czae119.

What are the priority welfare issues facing parrots in captivity? A modified Delphi approach to establish expert consensus.

Chalmers R, Cooper J, Ventura B Anim Welf. 2024; 33:e54.

PMID: 39600356 PMC: 11589074. DOI: 10.1017/awf.2024.57.

Guidance for engagement in health guideline development: A scoping review.

Petkovic J, Riddle A, Lytvyn L, Khabsa J, Akl E, Welch V Campbell Syst Rev. 2024; 20(4):e70006.

PMID: 39588485 PMC: 11586780. DOI: 10.1002/cl2.70006.

Assessing the feasibility and likelihood of policy options to lower specialty drug costs.

Taylor E, Khodyakov D, Predmore Z, Buttorff C, Kim A Health Aff Sch. 2024; 2(10):qxae118.

PMID: 39416396 PMC: 11482634. DOI: 10.1093/haschl/qxae118.

References

Leape L, Park R, Kahan J, Brook R . Group judgments of appropriateness: the effect of panel composition. Qual Assur Health Care. 1992; 4(2):151-9. View

Roman B, Feingold J . Patient-centered guideline development: best practices can improve the quality and impact of guidelines. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2014; 151(4):530-2. DOI: 10.1177/0194599814544878. View

Ann Hall D, Smith H, Heffernan E, Fackrell K . Recruiting and retaining participants in e-Delphi surveys for core outcome set development: Evaluating the COMiT'ID study. PLoS One. 2018; 13(7):e0201378. PMC: 6066228. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0201378. View

Forsythe L, Ellis L, Edmundson L, Sabharwal R, Rein A, Konopka K . Patient and Stakeholder Engagement in the PCORI Pilot Projects: Description and Lessons Learned. J Gen Intern Med. 2015; 31(1):13-21. PMC: 4700002. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-015-3450-z. View

den Breejen E, Nelen W, Knijnenburg J, Burgers J, Hermens R, Kremer J . Feasibility of a wiki as a participatory tool for patients in clinical guideline development. J Med Internet Res. 2012; 14(5):e138. PMC: 3510744. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.2080. View

Young A, Menon D, Street J, Al-Hertani W, Stafinski T . Engagement of Canadian Patients with Rare Diseases and Their Families in the Lifecycle of Therapy: A Qualitative Study. Patient. 2018; 11(3):353-359. DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0293-1. View

Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H . Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs. 2000; 32(4):1008-15. View

Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, Brook R . Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Public Health. 1984; 74(9):979-83. PMC: 1651783. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.74.9.979. View

Barham L . Public and patient involvement at the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Patient. 2011; 4(1):1-10. DOI: 10.2165/11586090-000000000-00000. View

10.

Birnkrant D, Bushby K, Bann C, Apkon S, Blackwell A, Brumbaugh D . Diagnosis and management of Duchenne muscular dystrophy, part 1: diagnosis, and neuromuscular, rehabilitation, endocrine, and gastrointestinal and nutritional management. Lancet Neurol. 2018; 17(3):251-267. PMC: 5869704. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(18)30024-3. View

11.

Khodyakov D, Hempel S, Rubenstein L, Shekelle P, Foy R, Salem-Schatz S . Conducting online expert panels: a feasibility and experimental replicability study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011; 11:174. PMC: 3313865. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-11-174. View

12.

Khodyakov D, Kinnett K, Grant S, Lucas A, Martin A, Denger B . Engaging Patients and Caregivers Managing Rare Diseases to Improve the Methods of Clinical Guideline Development: A Research Protocol. JMIR Res Protoc. 2017; 6(4):e57. PMC: 5429434. DOI: 10.2196/resprot.6902. View

13.

Dagenais S, Tricco A, Haldeman S . Synthesis of recommendations for the assessment and management of low back pain from recent clinical practice guidelines. Spine J. 2010; 10(6):514-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2010.03.032. View

14.

Khodyakov D, Mendoza-Graf A, Berry S, Nebeker C, Bromley E . Return of Value in the New Era of Biomedical Research-One Size Will Not Fit All. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2019; 10(4):265-275. PMC: 6803105. DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2019.1666175. View

15.

Denger B, Kinnett K, Martin A, Grant S, Armstrong C, Khodyakov D . Patient and caregiver perspectives on guideline adherence: the case of endocrine and bone health recommendations for Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019; 14(1):205. PMC: 6702715. DOI: 10.1186/s13023-019-1173-7. View

16.

Boelens P, Taylor C, Henning G, Marang-van de Mheen P, Espin E, Wiggers T . Involving patients in a multidisciplinary European consensus process and in the development of a 'patient summary of the consensus document for colon and rectal cancer care'. Patient. 2014; 7(3):261-70. DOI: 10.1007/s40271-014-0061-4. View

17.

Boivin A, Currie K, Fervers B, Gracia J, James M, Marshall C . Patient and public involvement in clinical guidelines: international experiences and future perspectives. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010; 19(5):e22. DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2009.034835. View

18.

Khodyakov D, Denger B, Grant S, Kinnett K, Armstrong C, Martin A . The RAND/PPMD Patient-Centeredness Method: a novel online approach to engaging patients and their representatives in guideline development. Eur J Pers Cent Healthc. 2021; 7(3):470-475. PMC: 8281319. View

19.

Lamontagne M, Perreault K, Gagnon M . Evaluation of the acceptability, feasibility and effectiveness of two methods of involving patients with disability in developing clinical guidelines: study protocol of a randomized pragmatic pilot trial. Trials. 2014; 15:118. PMC: 4022363. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-15-118. View

20.

Elwyn G, OConnor A, Stacey D, Volk R, Edwards A, Coulter A . Developing a quality criteria framework for patient decision aids: online international Delphi consensus process. BMJ. 2006; 333(7565):417. PMC: 1553508. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38926.629329.AE. View