Consensus on Outcome Measures for Glaucoma Effectiveness Trials: Results From a Delphi and Nominal Group Technique Approaches

PURPOSE: Comparing the relative effectiveness of interventions across glaucoma trials can be problematic due to differences in definitions of outcomes. We sought to identify a key set of clinical outcomes and reach consensus on how best to measure them from the perspective of glaucoma experts.

METHODS: A 2-round electronic Delphi survey was conducted. Round 1 involved 25 items identified from a systematic review. Round 2 was developed based on information gathered in round 1. A 10-point Likert scale was used to quantify importance and consensus of outcomes (7 outcomes) and ways of measuring them (44 measures). Experts were identified through 2 glaucoma societies membership-the UK and Eire Glaucoma Society and the European Glaucoma Society. A Nominal Group Technique (NGT) followed the Delphi process. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS: A total of 65 participants completed round 1 out of 320; of whom 56 completed round 2 (86%). Agreement on the importance of outcomes was reached on 48/51 items (94%). Intraocular pressure (IOP), visual field (VF), safety, and anatomic outcomes were classified as highly important. Regarding methods of measurement of IOP, "mean follow-up IOP" using Goldmann applanation tonometry achieved the highest importance, whereas for evaluating VFs "global index mean deviation/defect (MD)" and "rate of VF progression" were the most important. Retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) was identified as highly important. The NGT results reached consensus on "change of IOP (mean of 3 consecutive measurements taken at fixed time of day) from baseline," change of VF-MD values (3 reliable VFs at baseline and follow-up visit) from baseline, and change of RNFL thickness (2 good quality OCT images) from baseline.

CONCLUSIONS: Consensus was reached among glaucoma experts on how best to measure IOP, VF, and anatomic outcomes in glaucoma randomized controlled trials.

No second chance: junior neonatal nurses' experiences of caring for babies at the end-of-life and their families

Death of an infant is acutely stressful for parents and professionals. Little is known about junior nurses' experiences providing end-of-life care in Neonatal units (NNU). This study aimed to better understand junior nurses' experiences providing end-of-life care in NNU. Neonatal nurses (n = 12) with less than 3 years experience participated in a focus group. Nominal Group Technique (NGT) was used to build consensus around the challenges faced, alongside suggested developments in improving future care provision. Primary analysis involved successive rounds of ranking and decision-making whilst secondary analysis involved thematic analysis. All issues, whether environmental, professional or social appeared driven by an awareness on the part of nurses, that there was no ‘second chance’ which created a huge pressure to ‘get if right’ for the infants and families. Regarding future care 2 areas of improvement identified were ‘Education and Training’ and Support. This paper unpacks these findings making recommendations for practice.

No second chance: the experiences of junior neonatal nurses in providing end-of-life care for babies and families in the NNU

Background

An infant’s death is acutely stressful for parents and professionals. Little is known about junior nurses’ experiences providing end-of-life care in Neonatal Units (NNU).

Objectives

To better understand junior nurses’ experiences providing end-of-life care in NNU, the study explored the challenges and opportunities inherent in their practice relating to providing such care to babies and their families.

Methods

Neonatal nurses (n=12) with less than 3 years’ experience who were undergoing a neonatal education programme participated. Two focus groups were convened each with 6 nurses. The Ethics Committee at the relevant University approved the study. Nominal Group Technique (NGT) was used in the focus groups to build consensus around the challenges faced by junior nurses, alongside suggested developments in improving future care provision. Primary analysis involved successive rounds of ranking and decision making whilst secondary analysis involved thematic analysis.

Results

The study identified the pressures these nurses felt in having only one chance to ‘get it right’ for the infants and their families. They perceived the need for further ‘education and training’ highlighting that improved education provision would include both additional courses and internal training sessions. Greater ‘support’ from mentors themselves more experienced in this aspect of care within the NNU was identified as important in addressing issues around confidence building and skill development.

Conclusions

The results highlight junior nurses’ need for specific education and mentorship around end-of-life care for babies. This presentation will outline the implications for practice, education and further research.

An experiment in group learning technology: evaluating critical thinking in face-to-face and computer-supported seminars

Can learning quality be maintained in the face of increasing class size by the use of Computer Supported Co-operative Learning (CSCL) technologies? In particular, can Computer-Mediated Communication promote critical thinking in addition to surface information transfer? We compared face-to-face seminars with asynchronous computer conferencing in the same Information Management class. From Garrison's theory of critical thinking and Henri's critical reasoning skills, we developed two ways of evaluating critical thinking: a student questionnaire and a content analysis technique. We found evidence for critical thinking in both situations, with some subtle differences in learning style. This paper provides an overview of this work.

The effect of radiation technique and bladder filling on the acute toxicity of pelvic radiotherapy for localized high risk prostate cancer

Purpose: The goal of this project was to see if using IMRT to deliver elective pelvic nodal irradiation (EPNI) for prostate cancer reduced acute treatment toxicity.

Methods: Two hundred and thirty patients were enrolled into prospective trials delivering EPNI with a concomitant hypofractionated IMRT boost to the prostate. During accrual, the method of EPNI delivery changed as new literature emerged. Three methods were used (1) 4FB, (2) IMRT with 2 cm CTV margins around the pelvic vessels as suggested by Shih et al. (2005) [7] (IMRT-Shih), and (3) IMRT with nodal volumes suggested by the RTOG (IMRT-RTOG). Initially patients were treated with an empty bladder, with the remainder treated with bladder full.

Results: Patients in the 4FB group had higher rates of grade 2 acute GI toxicities compared to the IMRT-Shih and IMRT-RTOG groups (31.9% vs 20.8% vs 7.2%, p = 0.0009). Patients in the 4FB group had higher rates of grade 3 urinary frequency compared to the two IMRT groups (8.5% vs 0% vs 0%, p = 0.027). However, multivariate analysis suggested the factor that most influenced toxicity was bladder filling followed by IMRT.

Conclusions: Bladder filling appeared to be the dominant factor which predicted for acute toxicity, followed by the use of IMRT.

Is the raised volume rapid thoracic compression technique ready for use in clinical trials in infants with cystic fibrosis?

The European Cystic Fibrosis Society Clinical Trial Network (ECFS-CTN) has established a Standardization Committee to undertake a rigorous evaluation of promising outcome measures with regard to use in multicentre clinical trials in cystic fibrosis (CF). The aim of this article is to present a review of literature on clinimetric properties of the infant raised-volume rapid thoracic compression (RVRTC) technique in the context of CF, to summarise the consensus amongst the group on feasibility and answer key questions regarding the promotion of this technique to surrogate endpoint status.

METHODS: A literature search (from 1985 onwards) identified 20 papers that met inclusion criteria of RVRTC use in infants with CF. Data were extracted and tabulated regarding repeatability, validity, correlation with other outcome measures, responsiveness and reference values. A working group discussed the tables and answered 4 key questions.

RESULTS: Overall, RVRTC in particular forced expiratory volume in 0.5s, showed good clinimetric properties despite presence of individual variability. Few studies showed a relationship between RVRTC and inflammation and infection, and to date, data remains limited regarding the responsiveness of RVRTC after an intervention. Concerns were raised regarding feasibility in multi-centre studies and availability of reference values.

CONCLUSION: The ECFS-CTN Working Group considers that RVRTC cannot be used as a primary outcome in clinical trials in infants with CF before universal standardization of this measurement is achieved and implementation of inter-institutional networking is in place. We advise its use currently in phase I/II trials and as a secondary endpoint in phase III studies. We emphasise the need for (1) more short-term variability and longitudinal 'natural history' studies, and (2) robust reference values for commercially available devices.

PIPc study: development of indicators of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care using a modified Delphi technique

Objective There is limited evidence regarding the quality of prescribing for children in primary care. Several prescribing criteria (indicators) have been developed to assess the appropriateness of prescribing in older and middle-aged adults but few are relevant to children. The objective of this study was to develop a set of prescribing indicators that can be applied to prescribing or dispensing data sets to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care settings.


Design Two-round modified Delphi consensus method.


Setting Irish and UK general practice.


Participants A project steering group consisting of academic and clinical general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists was formed to develop a list of indicators from literature review and clinical expertise. 15 experts consisting of GPs, pharmacists and paediatricians from the Republic of Ireland and the UK formed the Delphi panel.


Results 47 indicators were reviewed by the project steering group and 16 were presented to the Delphi panel. In the first round of this exercise, consensus was achieved on nine of these indicators. Of the remaining seven indicators, two were removed following review of expert panel comments and discussion of the project steering group. The second round of the Delphi process focused on the remaining five indicators, which were amended based on first round feedback. Three indicators were accepted following the second round of the Delphi process and the remaining two indicators were removed. The final list consisted of 12 indicators categorised by respiratory system (n=6), gastrointestinal system (n=2), neurological system (n=2) and dermatological system (n=2).


Conclusions The PIPc indicators are a set of prescribing criteria developed for use in children in primary care in the absence of clinical information. The utility of these criteria will be tested in further studies using prescribing databases.