11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Report of a Delphi exercise to inform the design of a research programme on screening for thoracic aortic disease

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          To inform the design of a clinical trial of a targeted screening programme for relatives of individuals affected by thoracic aortic disease, we performed a consensus exercise as to the acceptability of screening, the optimal sequence and choice of tests, long-term patient management, and choice of trial design.

          Methods

          Working with the Aortic Dissection Awareness UK & Ireland patient association, we performed a Delphi exercise with clinical experts, patients, and carers, consisting of three rounds of consultation followed by a final multi-stakeholder face-to-face workshop.

          Results

          Thirty-five experts and 84 members of the public took part in the surveys, with 164 patients and clinicians attending the final workshop. There was substantial agreement on the need for a targeted screening pathway that would employ a combined approach (imaging + genetic testing). The target population would include the first- and second-degree adult (> 15 years) relatives, with no upper age limit of affected patients. Disagreement persisted about the screening process, sequence, personnel, the imaging method to adopt, computed tomography (CT) scan vs magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and the specifics of a potential trial, including willingness to undergo randomisation, and measures of effectiveness and acceptability.

          Conclusion

          A Delphi process, initiated by patients, identified areas of uncertainty with respect to behaviour, process, and the design of a targeted screening programme for thoracic aortic disease that requires further research prior to any future trial.

          Related collections

          Most cited references7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with Thoracic Aortic Disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American College of Radiology, American Stroke Association, Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Interventional Radiology, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and Society for Vascular Medicine.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Incidence, risk factors, outcome and projected future burden of acute aortic dissection.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Unwarranted Variation in the Quality of Care for Patients With Diseases of the Thoracic Aorta

              Background Thoracic aortic disease has a high mortality. We sought to establish the contribution of unwarranted variation in care to regional differences in outcomes observed in patients with thoracic aortic disease in England. Methods and Results Data from the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) and the National Adult Cardiac Surgery Audit (NACSA) were extracted. A parallel systematic review/meta‐analysis through December 2015, and structure and process questionnaire of English cardiac surgery units were also accomplished. Treatment and mortality rates were investigated. A total of 24 548 adult patients in the HES study, 8058 in the NACSA study, and 103 543 from a total of 33 studies in the systematic review were obtained. Treatment rates for thoracic aortic disease within 6 months of index admission ranged from 7.6% to 31.5% between English counties. Risk‐adjusted 6‐month mortality in untreated patients ranged from 19.4% to 36.3%. Regional variation persisted after adjustment for disease or patient factors. Regional cardiac units with higher case volumes treated more‐complex patients and had significantly lower risk‐adjusted mortality relative to low‐volume units. The results of the systematic review indicated that the delivery of care by multidisciplinary teams in high‐volume units resulted in better outcomes. The observational analyses and the online survey indicated that this is not how services are configured in most units in England. Conclusions Changes in the organization of services that address unwarranted variation in the provision of care for patients with thoracic aortic disease in England may result in more‐equitable access to treatment and improved outcomes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                rga8@leicester.ac.uk
                Journal
                Trials
                Trials
                Trials
                BioMed Central (London )
                1745-6215
                16 July 2020
                16 July 2020
                2020
                : 21
                : 656
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Clinical Sciences Wing, Glenfield General Hospital, Leicester, LE3 9QP UK
                [2 ]GRID grid.267308.8, ISNI 0000 0000 9206 2401, Division of Medical Genetics, Department of Internal Medicine, , The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, ; Houston, TX USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.412937.a, ISNI 0000 0004 0641 5987, Northern General Hospital, ; Herries Road, Sheffield, UK
                [4 ] https://aorticdissectionawareness.org/
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6004-8741
                Article
                4562
                10.1186/s13063-020-04562-1
                7367380
                32678053
                a1e9a24b-f1f1-4b3e-9fcc-aaf3f2d238cd
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 4 March 2020
                : 26 June 2020
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Medicine
                cardiovascular surgery,aortic dissection,patient and public involvement,public health
                Medicine
                cardiovascular surgery, aortic dissection, patient and public involvement, public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article