Since no uniform treatment protocol for pancreatic irreversible electroporation (IRE) exists, the heterogeneity throughout literature complicates the comparison of results. To reach agreement among experts, a consensus study was performed. Eleven experts, recruited according to predefined criteria regarding previous IRE publications, participated anonymously in three rounds of questionnaires according to a modified Delphi technique. Consensus was defined as having reached ≥80% agreement. Response rates were 100, 64, and 64% in rounds 1 to 3, respectively; consensus was reached in 93%. Pancreatic IRE should be considered for stage III pancreatic cancer and inoperable recurrent disease after previous local treatment. Absolute contraindications are ventricular arrhythmias, implantable stimulation devices, congestive heart failure NYHA class 4, and severe ascites. The inter-electrode distance should be 10 to 20 mm and the exposure length should be 15 mm. After 10 test pulses, 90 treatment pulses of 1,500 V/cm should be delivered continuously, with a 90-µs pulse length. The first postprocedural contrast-enhanced computed tomography should take place 1 month post-IRE, and then every 3 months. This article provides expert recommendations regarding patient selection, procedure, and follow-up for IRE treatment in pancreatic malignancies through a modified Delphi consensus study. Future studies should define the maximum tumor diameter, response evaluation criteria, and the optimal number of preoperative FOLFIRINOX cycles.

BACKGROUND: Family violence, which includes intimate partner abuse, child abuse, and elder abuse, is a serious public health concern. Primary healthcare (PHC) offers a vital opportunity to identify and address family violence, yet barriers prevent the effective implementation of family violence interventions in PHC settings. The purpose of this study is to improve family violence identification and response in Alberta\'s PHC settings by exploring readiness factors.
METHODS: An integrated knowledge translation approach, combining implementation science and participatory action research, was employed to develop a readiness assessment tool for addressing family violence within PHC settings in Alberta. The research involved three phases: phase 1 involved a rapid evidence assessment, phase 2 engaged a panel of healthcare and family violence experts to explore readiness components in the Alberta context, and phase 3 utilized a 3-round Delphi consensus-building process to refine readiness indicators.
RESULTS: Phase 1 findings from a rapid evidence assessment highlighted five main models/tools for assessing readiness to implement family violence interventions in PHC settings. In phase 2, additional concepts were identified through exploration with healthcare and family violence expert panel members, resulting in a total of 16 concepts for assessing family violence readiness within the Alberta PHC context. The 3-round Delphi consensus-building process in Phase 3 involved nine panelists, who collectively agreed on the inclusion of all concepts and indicators, yielding a total of 60 items for the proposed readiness assessment tool for addressing family violence in PHC within Alberta.
CONCLUSIONS: The current study lays the groundwork for future family violence intervention programs, offering insights into key components that promote readiness for implementing comprehensive programs and supporting PHC organizations in effectively addressing family violence.

Communication skill is a core competency and the training must begin in the undergraduate period itself. The Phase III MBBS students during their ENT posting are required to obtain informed consent for procedures and surgeries in ENT which forms the basis for efficient communication skills in house-surgency (internship) and residency. Informed consent taking is an important aspect and in the clinical postings, the teaching of communication skills along with history taking and physical examination can go a long way in making a strong foundation to good doctor patient relationships. This study aimed to compare the structured consent process using modified Delphi technique with the standard process in obtaining informed consent for procedures in ENT by PHASE III MBBS students. The need to sensitise the MBBS students on appropriate consent taking procedures with familiarisation of the essential elements of the Kalamazoo consensus statement were raised, accepted and final OSCE assessment attributes decided by the modified Delphi technique. The Modified Delphi technique is a unique means to obtain opinions of experts across the field in various spheres so as to identify lacunae if any in the existing teaching with means to reach a valid and reliable consensus. Our study included Phase III MBBS students posted to the Department of ENT, Govt Medical College Kozhikode during Jan-Feb 2022 wherein one batch of 30 students were taught with 2 classes on informed consent taking by the structured process obtained after Modified Delphi technique and included as; \"MD\" group and another batch of 30 students from the entire batch taught by the standard process was included as; \"T\" group respectively. After completion of the clinical postings an assessment was carried out with OSCE stations in Mar 2022; wherein 10 students were evaluated for each of the 6 common ENT procedures, 5 students from \"T\" group and 5 students from \"MD\" group respectively. Median total score of MD group was 6.5 (3.25-8) and median score of T group was 4.5 (2.25-6.75). The difference in mean ranks of these scores was statistically significant, p < 0.0001. The feedback assessment using the questionnaire with Likert scale had all 30(100%) students recommend this method of structured consent taking for enhancement of communications skills. However 20% of the students were not satisfied with the teaching learning method expressing the need for more time allocation and demonstrations. Informed consent taking requires the appropriate training in the undergraduate period itself as seen by the improved OSCE scores on assessment after teaching by the structured consent taking process as well as from the feedback of the students.

UNASSIGNED: Health sciences programmes operate in complex, unpredictable contexts, underscoring the need for comprehensive scaffolding of the learning processes. Yet, the scaffolding approaches remain fragmented, and lack a shared approach to how programmes could integrate scaffolding across the curricula. The literature argues that standards result in the comprehensive implementation of educational practices. There are no reported standards related to scaffolding practices in these programmes.
OBJECTIVE: To develop standards for scaffolding in health sciences programmes utilising a consensus approach through a modified Delphi Technique.
METHODS: Following the recommendations on Conducting and REporting of DElphi Studies (CREDES), an online modified Delphi technique was applied. Evidence on the application of scaffolding in health sciences programmes, obtained through an integrative review, was synthesised to draft standards. Using purposive and snowball sampling, an international panel from diverse geographical and professional backgrounds refined and validated the standards. Descriptive statistics was utilised to analyse demographic data and consensus agreements to include standards and criteria. Qualitative analysis of textual comments ensured the synthesis and inclusion of critical divergent views and additions.
RESULTS: A total of 22 experts from around the globe agreed to participate in the study and one did not complete Delphi surveys. Most experts (n = 18) held a PhD; and an average of 19 years of teaching in health sciences programmes. Four standards and 27 criteria were included after achieving consensus during the two Delphi surveys rounds. The included standards focused on four areas: structuring and sequencing educational activities, resources/tools for scaffolding, structuring the programme and instructional strategies to support learning.
CONCLUSIONS: The principle-based standards developed in this study could direct and support scaffolding practices in health sciences programmes. The standards\' emphases on macro-, meso- and micro-scaffolding present numerous opportunities for designing and applying contextually sensitive scaffolding strategies at every level of curriculum implementation.

To perform a Delphi consensus for return to sports (RTS) following sports-related concussion (SRC).
Open-ended questions in rounds 1 and 2 were answered. The results of the first 2 rounds were used to develop a Likert-style questionnaire for round 3. If agreement at round 3 was ≤80% for an item, if panel members were outside consensus or there were >30% neither agree/disagree responses, the results were carried forward into round 4. The level of agreement and consensus was defined as 90%.
Individualized graduated RTS protocols should be used. A normal clinical, ocular and balance examination with no more headaches, and asymptomatic exertional test allows RTS. Earlier RTS can be considered if athletes are symptom free. The Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 5 and vestibular and ocular motor screening are recognized as useful tools to assist in decision-making. Ultimately RTS is a clinical decision. Baseline assessments should be performed at both collegiate and professional level and a combination of neurocognitive and clinical tests should be used. A specific number of recurrent concussions for season-or career-ending decisions could not be determined but will affect decision making for RTS.
Consensus was achieved for 10 of the 25 RTS criteria: early RTS can be considered earlier than 48 to 72 hours if athletes are completely symptom-free with no headaches, a normal clinical, ocular and balance examination. A graduated RTS should be used but should be individualized. Only 2 of the 9 assessment tools were considered to be useful: Sports Concussion Assessment Tool 5 and vestibular and ocular motor screening. RTS is mainly a clinical decision. Only 31% of the baseline assessment items achieved consensus: baseline assessments should be performed at collegiate and professional levels using a combination of neurocognitive and clinical tests. The panel disagreed on the number of recurrent concussions that should be season- or career-ending.
Level V, expert Opinion.

To perform a Delphi consensus for on-field and pitch-side assessment of sports-related concussion (SRC).
Open-ended questions in rounds 1 and 2 were answered. The results of the first 2 rounds were used to develop a Likert-style questionnaire for round 3. If agreement at round 3 was ≤80% for an item, if panel members were outside consensus, or there were >30% neither agree/disagree responses, the results were carried forward into round 4. The level of agreement and consensus was defined as 90%.
Loss of consciousness (LOC) or suspected LOC, motor incoordination/ataxia, balance disturbance, confusion/disorientation, memory disturbance/amnesia, blurred vision/light sensitivity, irritability, slurred speech, slow reaction time, lying motionless, dizziness, headaches/pressure in the head, falling to the ground with no protective action, slow to get up after a hit, dazed look, and posturing/seizures were clinical signs of SRC and indicate removal from play. Video assessment is helpful but should not replace clinical judgment. LOC/unresponsiveness, signs of cervical spine injury, suspicion of other fractures (skull/maxillo-facial), seizures, Glasgow Coma Scale score <14 and abnormal neurologic examination findings are indications for hospitalization. Return to play should only be considered when no clinical signs of SRC are present. Every suspected concussion should be referred to an experienced physician.
Consensus was achieved for 85% of the clinical signs indicating concussion. On-field and pitch-side assessment should include the observation of the mechanism, a clinical examination, and cervical spine assessment. Of the 19 signs and red flags requiring removal from play, consensus was reached for 74%. Normal clinical examination and HIA with no signs of concussion allow return to play. Video assessment should be mandatory for professional games but should not replace clinical decision-making. Sports Concussion Assessment Tool, Glasgow Coma Scale, vestibular/ocular motor screening, Head Injury Assessment Criteria 1, and Maddocks questions are useful tools. Guidelines are helpful for non-health professionals.
Level V, expert opinion.

The transition towards Competency-Based Medical Education at the Cumming School of Medicine was accelerated by the reduced clinical time caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to define a standard protocol for setting Entrustable Professional Activity (EPA) achievement thresholds and examine their feasibility within the clinical clerkship.
Achievement thresholds for each of the 12 AFMC EPAs for graduating Canadian medical students were set by using sequential rounds of revision by three consecutive groups of stakeholders and evaluation experts. Structured communication was guided by a modified Delphi technique. The feasibility/consequence models of these EPAs were then assessed by tracking their completion by the graduating class of 2021.
The threshold-setting process resulted in set EPA achievement levels ranging from 1 to 8 across the 12 AFMC EPAs. Estimates were stable after the first round for 9 of 12 EPAs. 96.27% of EPAs were successfully completed by clerkship students despite the shortened clinical period. Feasibility was predicted by the slowing rate of EPA accumulation overtime during the clerkship.
The process described led to consensus on EPA achievement thresholds. Successful completion of the assigned thresholds was feasible within the shortened clerkship.[Box: see text].

BACKGROUND: With the increase in the number of new cancer cases, the number of patients receiving chemotherapy increases. The administration of chemotherapy is a very significant task. Unfortunately, the availability of a chemotherapy administration checklist still lags behind. The aim is to develop a chemotherapy administration checklist for patients receiving chemotherapy.
METHODS: This study was conducted at the oncology day care and in-patient department (IPD) wards of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. Methodological research design was used in this study. It took place in five phases: preliminary phase includes literature review, focussed group discussion, assessment of current practices, generation of item pool, and preparation of preliminary draft; then its validation by modified Delphi technique, pilot testing; final try out, and evaluation phase. A total of 260 patients were enrolled.
RESULTS: The content validity index was 0.97. To perform factor analysis and principal component analysis KMO and Bartlett\'s test of sphericity was used, which allows the data for factor analysis to yield eight components. A total of 26 items were formulated. The scoring was done dichotomously; a score of 1 is for done and 0 for not done and not applicable. Cronbach\'s alpha was used to find out the internal consistency of the checklist was found to be 0.72. For interrater reliability, the Cohen kappa\'s value was found to be 0.91.
CONCLUSIONS: Chemotherapy administration checklist was a valid and reliable checklist. This checklist is feasible and easy to incorporate into clinical practices.

UNASSIGNED: Despite representing the largest occupational group within the healthcare workforce, evidence suggests that due to the complexity of nursing practice, nurses\' contribution remains \'invisible\'. Quality Care Metrics aligned to standards can offer valuable numerical information that quantify input, output and dimensions of nursing care processes in complex clinical and interprofessional milieus.
UNASSIGNED: Progress an evidence-based metric system to measure the quality and clinical safety of nursing care within acute care in Ireland. The objectives were to: classify quality care process nursing metrics and corresponding indicators pertinent to acute care; reach agreement on a selected set of robust metrics and corresponding indicators; and implement the findings of the study.
UNASSIGNED: A modified four-round Delphi study.
UNASSIGNED: The modified Delphi study integrated a four-round survey of 422 nurses, face-to-face meetings with a patient representative and key stakeholders within acute services with a final consensus meeting inclusive of a panel of 26 expert nurse clinicians.
UNASSIGNED: There was consensus on 11 quality care process nursing metrics and 53 corresponding indicators for the acute care setting. Despite the rating of \'critical\' in the Delphi rounds, a concern was reported by participants on the subjective nature of three of the developed metrics: \'patient experience\', \'patient engagement\' and \'professional and ethical approach to care\' based on the absence of objective measurement tools that include patient input. Conversely, this led to the conundrum for the panel of experts at the final consensus meeting who were divided in their views on objectively observing, recording and subsequent auditing of those three developed metrics in real-time clinical practice.
UNASSIGNED: This paper describes the operationalisation of a modified Delphi technique that progressed a set of 11 quality care process metrics and 53 corresponding indicators. The challenge now is the implementation of these quality care process metrics so that nurses\' contribution to patient-centred care is tangible in acute care.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic pain prescribed long-term opioid therapy may come to a point where the benefits of the therapy are outweighed by the risks and tapering is indicated. At the 2019 Veterans Health Administration State of the Art Conference, there was an acknowledgment of a lack of clinical guidance with regard to treating this subset of patients. Some of the participants believed clinicians and patients would both benefit from a new diagnostic entity describing this situation.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine if a new diagnostic entity was needed and what the criteria of the diagnostic entity would be. Given the ability of the Delphi method to synthesize input from a broad range of experts, we felt this technique was the most appropriate for this study.
METHODS: We designed a modified Delphi technique involving 3 rounds. The first round is a series of open-ended questions asking about the necessity of this diagnostic entity, how this condition is different from opioid use disorder, and what its possible diagnostic criteria would be. After synthesizing the responses collected, a second round will be conducted to ask participants to rate the different responses offered by their peers. These ratings will be collected and analyzed, and will generate a preliminary definition for this clinical phenomena. In the third round, we will circulate this definition with the aim of achieving consensus.
RESULTS: The modified Delphi study was initiated in July of 2020 and analysis is currently underway.
CONCLUSIONS: This protocol has been approved by the Internal Review Board at the Connecticut Veterans Affairs and the study is in process. This protocol may assist other researchers conducting similar studies.
UNASSIGNED: DERR1-10.2196/33310.