[Pubmed] Expert consensus recommendations for improving and standardising the assessment of patients with generalised my
Posté : 25 mars 2024 11:00
Eur J Neurol. 2024 Mar 24:e16280. doi: 10.1111/ene.16280. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Regular and consistent disease assessment could provide a clearer picture of burden in generalised myasthenia gravis (gMG) and improve patient care; however, the use of assessment tools in practice lacks standardisation. This modified Delphi approach was taken to review current evidence on assessment tool use in gMG and develop expert-derived consensus recommendations for good practice.
METHODS: A European expert panel of 15 experienced gMG neurologists contributed to development of this consensus, four of whom formed a lead Sub-committee. The PICO (Population, Intervention, Control, Outcomes) framework was used to define six clinical questions on gMG assessment tools, a systematic literature review was conducted, and evidence-based statements were developed. According to a modified Delphi voting process, consensus was reached when ≥70% of the experts rated agreement with a statement as ≥8 on a scale of 1-10.
RESULTS: Eighteen expert- and evidence-based consensus statements based on six themes were developed. Key recommendations include: consistent use of the Myasthenia Gravis Activities of Daily Living score (MG-ADL) across clinical settings, followed by a simple question (e.g., Patient Acceptable Symptom State ) or scale to determine patient satisfaction in clinical practice; use of a Quantitative Myasthenia Gravis [QMG] or quality of life [QoL] assessment when the MG-ADL indicates disease worsening; and consideration of symptom state to determine the timing and frequency of recommended assessments. Expert panel consensus was reached on all 18 statements after two voting rounds.
CONCLUSIONS: This process provided evidence- and expert consensus-based recommendations for the use of objective and subjective assessment tools across gMG research and care to improve management and outcomes for patients.
PMID:38523419 | DOI:10.1111/ene.16280
Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3852341 ... t9+e462414