A modified Delphi study to identify which items should be evaluated in shoulder instability research: a first step in developing a core outcome set

Lukas P.E. Verweij; Inger N. Sierevelt; the SINC study group; David N. Baden; Robert Jan Derksen; Henk Jan van der Woude; Karin M.C. Hekman; Michel P.J. van den Bekerom

doi:10.1016/j.jseint.2023.06.012

A modified Delphi study to identify which items should be evaluated in shoulder instability research: a first step in developing a core outcome set

Lukas P.E. Verweij^*
, Inger N. Sierevelt
, the SINC study group
, David N. Baden
, Robert Jan Derksen
, Henk Jan van der Woude
, Karin M.C. Hekman
, Michel P.J. van den Bekerom

^*Corresponding author for this work

University of Amsterdam
Amsterdam UMC
Amsterdam Shoulder and Elbow Center of Expertise (ASECE)
Xpert Clinic (Hilversum)
Spaarne Gasthuis Academy
Diakonessenhuis Utrecht
Zaandam Medical Center
Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis
Shoulder Center IBC Amstelland
Medical Center Jan van Goyen
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

85 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to identify items that healthcare providers and/or patients consider important to include in a questionnaire for clinical trials and cohort studies in shoulder instability research. This could serve as a basis to develop a core outcome set for shoulder instability research. Methods: Healthcare providers and patients were included in a panel for a modified Delphi consensus study. The study consisted of three rounds, comprising (1) identifying items, (2) rating the importance of the items, and (3) rating the importance again after seeing a summary of the results of round two. Importance was rated on a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% of the panel giving a score of 7 or higher. Results: In total, 44 healthcare providers and 30 patients completed all three rounds. Round one identified 54 items. After round three, the panel reached a consensus on 11 items that should be included in a questionnaire, comprising re-dislocation (99%), instable feeling of the shoulder (96%), limitations during sport (93%), patient satisfaction with the shoulder (93%), fear/anxiety for re-dislocation (91%), range of motion (88%), return to old level of functioning (85%), performing daily activities (85%), return to sport (82%), return to work (82%), and trusting the shoulder (81%). Conclusion: Healthcare providers and patients reached a consensus on 11 items that should be included in a questionnaire for shoulder instability research. These items can facilitate design and development of future clinical trials and form the basis for the development of a core outcome set.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	2304-2310
Number of pages	7
Journal	JSES Open Access
Volume	7
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseint.2023.06.012
Publication status	Published - Nov 2023

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jseint.2023.06.012Licence: CC BY

PIIS2666638323001585Final published version, 1.37 MBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

Verweij, L. P. E., Sierevelt, I. N., the SINC study group, Baden, D. N., Derksen, R. J., van der Woude, H. J., Hekman, K. M. C., & van den Bekerom, M. P. J. (2023). A modified Delphi study to identify which items should be evaluated in shoulder instability research: a first step in developing a core outcome set. JSES Open Access, 7(6), 2304-2310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseint.2023.06.012

@article{aabe595834a74edb934470a76678ab67,

title = "A modified Delphi study to identify which items should be evaluated in shoulder instability research: a first step in developing a core outcome set",

abstract = "Background: The aim of this study was to identify items that healthcare providers and/or patients consider important to include in a questionnaire for clinical trials and cohort studies in shoulder instability research. This could serve as a basis to develop a core outcome set for shoulder instability research. Methods: Healthcare providers and patients were included in a panel for a modified Delphi consensus study. The study consisted of three rounds, comprising (1) identifying items, (2) rating the importance of the items, and (3) rating the importance again after seeing a summary of the results of round two. Importance was rated on a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80\% of the panel giving a score of 7 or higher. Results: In total, 44 healthcare providers and 30 patients completed all three rounds. Round one identified 54 items. After round three, the panel reached a consensus on 11 items that should be included in a questionnaire, comprising re-dislocation (99\%), instable feeling of the shoulder (96\%), limitations during sport (93\%), patient satisfaction with the shoulder (93\%), fear/anxiety for re-dislocation (91\%), range of motion (88\%), return to old level of functioning (85\%), performing daily activities (85\%), return to sport (82\%), return to work (82\%), and trusting the shoulder (81\%). Conclusion: Healthcare providers and patients reached a consensus on 11 items that should be included in a questionnaire for shoulder instability research. These items can facilitate design and development of future clinical trials and form the basis for the development of a core outcome set.",

author = "Verweij, \{Lukas P.E.\} and Sierevelt, \{Inger N.\} and \{the SINC study group\} and Baden, \{David N.\} and Derksen, \{Robert Jan\} and \{van der Woude\}, \{Henk Jan\} and Hekman, \{Karin M.C.\} and \{van den Bekerom\}, \{Michel P.J.\} and \{van den Borne\}, M. and \{van der Linde\}, \{J. A.\} and \{van Deurzen\}, \{D. F.P.\} and \{van der Meijden\}, \{O. A.J.\} and Alta, \{T. D.W.\} and B. Muller and S. Floor and Wessel, \{R. N.\} and \{van Noort\}, A. and Kooistra, \{B. W.\} and T. Gosens and Kleinlugtenbelt, \{Y. V.\} and Berendes, \{T. D.\} and \{van der Veen\}, \{H. C.\} and C. Visser and \{van den Brand\}, \{C. L.\} and Wildevuur-Houthoff, \{A. M.L.\} and A. Wei and R. Verbeek and Barten, \{D. G.\} and Verdonschot, \{R. J.C.G.\} and T. Boeije and F. Roodheuvel and \{Huis in {\textquoteright}t Veld\}, \{M. A.\} and E. R{\"o}ttger and M. Versteegen and D. Douma and \{Azijli {\textendash} Abdellaoui\}, K. and L. Walraven and R. Boden and N. Sluijter and \{van Gastel\}, \{M. L.\} and \{van den Berg\}, W. and P. Jansen-Oskam and Haas, \{I. S.\} and H. Nes and G. Koel and B. Hessel and D. Heijblok and Husen, \{I. M.\} and M. Numan and F. Boon",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2023 The Author(s)",

year = "2023",

month = nov,

doi = "10.1016/j.jseint.2023.06.012",

language = "English",

volume = "7",

pages = "2304--2310",

journal = "JSES Open Access",

issn = "2468-6026",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "6",

}

Verweij, LPE, Sierevelt, IN, the SINC study group, Baden, DN, Derksen, RJ, van der Woude, HJ, Hekman, KMC & van den Bekerom, MPJ 2023, 'A modified Delphi study to identify which items should be evaluated in shoulder instability research: a first step in developing a core outcome set', JSES Open Access, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 2304-2310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseint.2023.06.012

TY - JOUR

T1 - A modified Delphi study to identify which items should be evaluated in shoulder instability research

T2 - a first step in developing a core outcome set

AU - Verweij, Lukas P.E.

AU - Sierevelt, Inger N.

AU - the SINC study group

AU - Baden, David N.

AU - Derksen, Robert Jan

AU - van der Woude, Henk Jan

AU - Hekman, Karin M.C.

AU - van den Bekerom, Michel P.J.

AU - van den Borne, M.

AU - van der Linde, J. A.

AU - van Deurzen, D. F.P.

AU - van der Meijden, O. A.J.

AU - Alta, T. D.W.

AU - Muller, B.

AU - Floor, S.

AU - Wessel, R. N.

AU - van Noort, A.

AU - Kooistra, B. W.

AU - Gosens, T.

AU - Kleinlugtenbelt, Y. V.

AU - Berendes, T. D.

AU - van der Veen, H. C.

AU - Visser, C.

AU - van den Brand, C. L.

AU - Wildevuur-Houthoff, A. M.L.

AU - Wei, A.

AU - Verbeek, R.

AU - Barten, D. G.

AU - Verdonschot, R. J.C.G.

AU - Boeije, T.

AU - Roodheuvel, F.

AU - Huis in ’t Veld, M. A.

AU - Röttger, E.

AU - Versteegen, M.

AU - Douma, D.

AU - Azijli – Abdellaoui, K.

AU - Walraven, L.

AU - Boden, R.

AU - Sluijter, N.

AU - van Gastel, M. L.

AU - van den Berg, W.

AU - Jansen-Oskam, P.

AU - Haas, I. S.

AU - Nes, H.

AU - Koel, G.

AU - Hessel, B.

AU - Heijblok, D.

AU - Husen, I. M.

AU - Numan, M.

AU - Boon, F.

PY - 2023/11

Y1 - 2023/11

N2 - Background: The aim of this study was to identify items that healthcare providers and/or patients consider important to include in a questionnaire for clinical trials and cohort studies in shoulder instability research. This could serve as a basis to develop a core outcome set for shoulder instability research. Methods: Healthcare providers and patients were included in a panel for a modified Delphi consensus study. The study consisted of three rounds, comprising (1) identifying items, (2) rating the importance of the items, and (3) rating the importance again after seeing a summary of the results of round two. Importance was rated on a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% of the panel giving a score of 7 or higher. Results: In total, 44 healthcare providers and 30 patients completed all three rounds. Round one identified 54 items. After round three, the panel reached a consensus on 11 items that should be included in a questionnaire, comprising re-dislocation (99%), instable feeling of the shoulder (96%), limitations during sport (93%), patient satisfaction with the shoulder (93%), fear/anxiety for re-dislocation (91%), range of motion (88%), return to old level of functioning (85%), performing daily activities (85%), return to sport (82%), return to work (82%), and trusting the shoulder (81%). Conclusion: Healthcare providers and patients reached a consensus on 11 items that should be included in a questionnaire for shoulder instability research. These items can facilitate design and development of future clinical trials and form the basis for the development of a core outcome set.

AB - Background: The aim of this study was to identify items that healthcare providers and/or patients consider important to include in a questionnaire for clinical trials and cohort studies in shoulder instability research. This could serve as a basis to develop a core outcome set for shoulder instability research. Methods: Healthcare providers and patients were included in a panel for a modified Delphi consensus study. The study consisted of three rounds, comprising (1) identifying items, (2) rating the importance of the items, and (3) rating the importance again after seeing a summary of the results of round two. Importance was rated on a 9-point Likert scale. Consensus was defined as ≥ 80% of the panel giving a score of 7 or higher. Results: In total, 44 healthcare providers and 30 patients completed all three rounds. Round one identified 54 items. After round three, the panel reached a consensus on 11 items that should be included in a questionnaire, comprising re-dislocation (99%), instable feeling of the shoulder (96%), limitations during sport (93%), patient satisfaction with the shoulder (93%), fear/anxiety for re-dislocation (91%), range of motion (88%), return to old level of functioning (85%), performing daily activities (85%), return to sport (82%), return to work (82%), and trusting the shoulder (81%). Conclusion: Healthcare providers and patients reached a consensus on 11 items that should be included in a questionnaire for shoulder instability research. These items can facilitate design and development of future clinical trials and form the basis for the development of a core outcome set.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85170109213

U2 - 10.1016/j.jseint.2023.06.012

DO - 10.1016/j.jseint.2023.06.012

M3 - Article

C2 - 37969539

AN - SCOPUS:85170109213

SN - 2468-6026

VL - 7

SP - 2304

EP - 2310

JO - JSES Open Access

JF - JSES Open Access

IS - 6

ER -

A modified Delphi study to identify which items should be evaluated in shoulder instability research: a first step in developing a core outcome set

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this