Cargando…

A Core Outcome Set for Seamless, Standardized Evaluation of Innovative Surgical Procedures and Devices (COHESIVE): A Patient and Professional Stakeholder Consensus Study

To develop a COS, an agreed minimum set of outcomes to measure and report in all studies evaluating the introduction and evaluation of novel surgical techniques. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Agreement on the key outcomes to measure and report for safe and efficient surgical innovation is lacking, hin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Avery, Kerry N.L., Wilson, Nicholas, Macefield, Rhiannon, McNair, Angus, Hoffmann, Christin, Blazeby, Jane M., Potter, Shelley
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9831031/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34102667
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000004975
_version_ 1784867786297704448
author Avery, Kerry N.L.
Wilson, Nicholas
Macefield, Rhiannon
McNair, Angus
Hoffmann, Christin
Blazeby, Jane M.
Potter, Shelley
author_facet Avery, Kerry N.L.
Wilson, Nicholas
Macefield, Rhiannon
McNair, Angus
Hoffmann, Christin
Blazeby, Jane M.
Potter, Shelley
author_sort Avery, Kerry N.L.
collection PubMed
description To develop a COS, an agreed minimum set of outcomes to measure and report in all studies evaluating the introduction and evaluation of novel surgical techniques. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Agreement on the key outcomes to measure and report for safe and efficient surgical innovation is lacking, hindering transparency and risking patient harm. METHODS: (I) Generation of a list of outcome domains from published innovation-specific literature, policy/regulatory body documents, and surgeon interviews; (II) Prioritization of identified outcome domains using an international, multi-stakeholder Delphi survey; (III) Consensus meeting to agree the final COS. Participants were international stakeholders, including patients/public, surgeons, device manufacturers, regulators, trialists, methodologists, and journal editors. RESULTS: A total of 7972 verbatim outcomes were identified, categorized into 32 domains, and formatted into survey items/questions. Four hundred ten international participants (220 professionals, 190 patients/public) completed at least one round 1 survey item, of which 153 (69.5%) professionals and 116 (61.1%) patients completed at least one round 2 item. Twelve outcomes were scored “consensus in” (“very important” by ≥70% of patients and professionals) and 20 “no consensus.” A consensus meeting, involving context: modifications, unexpected disadvantages, device problems, technical procedure completion success, patients’ experience relating to the procedure being innovative, surgeons’/operators’ experience. Other domains relate to intended benefits, whether the overall desired effect was achieved and expected disadvantages. CONCLUSIONS: The COS is recommended for use in all studies before definitive randomized controlled trial evaluation to promote safe, transparent, and efficient surgical innovation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9831031
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98310312023-01-12 A Core Outcome Set for Seamless, Standardized Evaluation of Innovative Surgical Procedures and Devices (COHESIVE): A Patient and Professional Stakeholder Consensus Study Avery, Kerry N.L. Wilson, Nicholas Macefield, Rhiannon McNair, Angus Hoffmann, Christin Blazeby, Jane M. Potter, Shelley Ann Surg Original Articles To develop a COS, an agreed minimum set of outcomes to measure and report in all studies evaluating the introduction and evaluation of novel surgical techniques. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Agreement on the key outcomes to measure and report for safe and efficient surgical innovation is lacking, hindering transparency and risking patient harm. METHODS: (I) Generation of a list of outcome domains from published innovation-specific literature, policy/regulatory body documents, and surgeon interviews; (II) Prioritization of identified outcome domains using an international, multi-stakeholder Delphi survey; (III) Consensus meeting to agree the final COS. Participants were international stakeholders, including patients/public, surgeons, device manufacturers, regulators, trialists, methodologists, and journal editors. RESULTS: A total of 7972 verbatim outcomes were identified, categorized into 32 domains, and formatted into survey items/questions. Four hundred ten international participants (220 professionals, 190 patients/public) completed at least one round 1 survey item, of which 153 (69.5%) professionals and 116 (61.1%) patients completed at least one round 2 item. Twelve outcomes were scored “consensus in” (“very important” by ≥70% of patients and professionals) and 20 “no consensus.” A consensus meeting, involving context: modifications, unexpected disadvantages, device problems, technical procedure completion success, patients’ experience relating to the procedure being innovative, surgeons’/operators’ experience. Other domains relate to intended benefits, whether the overall desired effect was achieved and expected disadvantages. CONCLUSIONS: The COS is recommended for use in all studies before definitive randomized controlled trial evaluation to promote safe, transparent, and efficient surgical innovation. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2023-02 2023-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9831031/ /pubmed/34102667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000004975 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
spellingShingle Original Articles
Avery, Kerry N.L.
Wilson, Nicholas
Macefield, Rhiannon
McNair, Angus
Hoffmann, Christin
Blazeby, Jane M.
Potter, Shelley
A Core Outcome Set for Seamless, Standardized Evaluation of Innovative Surgical Procedures and Devices (COHESIVE): A Patient and Professional Stakeholder Consensus Study
title A Core Outcome Set for Seamless, Standardized Evaluation of Innovative Surgical Procedures and Devices (COHESIVE): A Patient and Professional Stakeholder Consensus Study
title_full A Core Outcome Set for Seamless, Standardized Evaluation of Innovative Surgical Procedures and Devices (COHESIVE): A Patient and Professional Stakeholder Consensus Study
title_fullStr A Core Outcome Set for Seamless, Standardized Evaluation of Innovative Surgical Procedures and Devices (COHESIVE): A Patient and Professional Stakeholder Consensus Study
title_full_unstemmed A Core Outcome Set for Seamless, Standardized Evaluation of Innovative Surgical Procedures and Devices (COHESIVE): A Patient and Professional Stakeholder Consensus Study
title_short A Core Outcome Set for Seamless, Standardized Evaluation of Innovative Surgical Procedures and Devices (COHESIVE): A Patient and Professional Stakeholder Consensus Study
title_sort core outcome set for seamless, standardized evaluation of innovative surgical procedures and devices (cohesive): a patient and professional stakeholder consensus study
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9831031/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34102667
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000004975
work_keys_str_mv AT averykerrynl acoreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT wilsonnicholas acoreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT macefieldrhiannon acoreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT mcnairangus acoreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT hoffmannchristin acoreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT blazebyjanem acoreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT pottershelley acoreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT averykerrynl coreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT wilsonnicholas coreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT macefieldrhiannon coreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT mcnairangus coreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT hoffmannchristin coreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT blazebyjanem coreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy
AT pottershelley coreoutcomesetforseamlessstandardizedevaluationofinnovativesurgicalproceduresanddevicescohesiveapatientandprofessionalstakeholderconsensusstudy