Using a Delphi process to determine optimal care for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Burmeister, EA; Jordan, SJ; O'Connell, DL; Beesley, VL; Goldstein, D; Gooden, HM; Janda, M; Merrett, ND; Wyld, D; Neale, RE; Pancreatic Cancer Clinical Working Group,

Using a Delphi process to determine optimal care for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Burmeister, EA Jordan, SJ O'Connell, DL Beesley, VL Goldstein, D Gooden, HM Janda, M Merrett, ND Wyld, D Neale, RE Pancreatic Cancer Clinical Working Group,

Permalink

Publisher:: WILEY
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Asia Pac J Clin Oncol, 2016, 12, (2), pp. 105-114
Issue Date:: 2016-06

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	Asia-Pac J Clncl Oncology - 2016 - Burmeister - Using a Delphi process to determine optimal care for patients with.pdf	Published version	381.8 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Burmeister, EA
dc.contributor.author	Jordan, SJ
dc.contributor.author	O'Connell, DL
dc.contributor.author	Beesley, VL
dc.contributor.author	Goldstein, D
dc.contributor.author	Gooden, HM
dc.contributor.author	Janda, M
dc.contributor.author	Merrett, ND
dc.contributor.author	Wyld, D
dc.contributor.author	Neale, RE
dc.contributor.author	Pancreatic Cancer Clinical Working Group,
dc.date.accessioned	2022-02-10T07:14:55Z
dc.date.available	2015-11-23
dc.date.available	2022-02-10T07:14:55Z
dc.date.issued	2016-06
dc.identifier.citation	Asia Pac J Clin Oncol, 2016, 12, (2), pp. 105-114
dc.identifier.issn	1743-7555
dc.identifier.issn	1743-7563
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/154385
dc.description.abstract	AIM: Overall 5-year survival for pancreatic cancer is ∼5%. Optimizing the care that pancreatic cancer patients receive may be one way of improving outcomes. The objective of this study was to establish components of care which Australian health professionals believe important to optimally manage patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Using a Delphi process, a multidisciplinary panel of 250 health professionals were invited to provide a list of factors they considered important for optimal care of pancreatic cancer patients. They were then asked to score and then rescore (from one [no importance/disagree] to 10 [very important/agree]) the factors. The mean and coefficient of variation scores were calculated and categorized into three levels of importance. RESULTS: Overall, 63 (66% of those sent the final questionnaire; 25% of those initially invited) health professionals from nine disciplines completed the final scoring of 55 statements/factors encompassing themes of presentation/staging, surgery and biliary obstruction, multidisciplinary team details and oncology. Mean scores ranged from 3.7 to 9.7 with the highest related to communication and patient assessment. There was substantial intra- and interdisciplinary variation in views about MDT membership and roles. CONCLUSION: Overall, the opinions of Australian health professionals reflect international guideline recommended care; however, they identified a number of additional factors focusing on where patients should be treated, the importance of clear communication and the need for multidisciplinary care which were not included in current clinical practice guidelines. Differences in priorities between specialty groups were also identified.
dc.format	Print-Electronic
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	WILEY
dc.relation.ispartof	Asia Pac J Clin Oncol
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1111/ajco.12450
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subject	1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis
dc.subject.classification	Oncology & Carcinogenesis
dc.subject.mesh	Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Aged, 80 and over
dc.subject.mesh	Australia
dc.subject.mesh	Delphi Technique
dc.subject.mesh	Disease Management
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Health Personnel
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Male
dc.subject.mesh	Pancreatic Neoplasms
dc.subject.mesh	Surveys and Questionnaires
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Pancreatic Neoplasms
dc.subject.mesh	Delphi Technique
dc.subject.mesh	Aged
dc.subject.mesh	Aged, 80 and over
dc.subject.mesh	Health Personnel
dc.subject.mesh	Disease Management
dc.subject.mesh	Australia
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Male
dc.subject.mesh	Surveys and Questionnaires
dc.title	Using a Delphi process to determine optimal care for patients with pancreatic cancer.
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	12
utslib.location.activity	Australia
utslib.for	1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/IMPACCT
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
dc.date.updated	2022-02-10T07:14:54Z
pubs.issue	2
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	12
utslib.citation.issue	2

Abstract:

AIM: Overall 5-year survival for pancreatic cancer is ∼5%. Optimizing the care that pancreatic cancer patients receive may be one way of improving outcomes. The objective of this study was to establish components of care which Australian health professionals believe important to optimally manage patients with pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Using a Delphi process, a multidisciplinary panel of 250 health professionals were invited to provide a list of factors they considered important for optimal care of pancreatic cancer patients. They were then asked to score and then rescore (from one [no importance/disagree] to 10 [very important/agree]) the factors. The mean and coefficient of variation scores were calculated and categorized into three levels of importance. RESULTS: Overall, 63 (66% of those sent the final questionnaire; 25% of those initially invited) health professionals from nine disciplines completed the final scoring of 55 statements/factors encompassing themes of presentation/staging, surgery and biliary obstruction, multidisciplinary team details and oncology. Mean scores ranged from 3.7 to 9.7 with the highest related to communication and patient assessment. There was substantial intra- and interdisciplinary variation in views about MDT membership and roles. CONCLUSION: Overall, the opinions of Australian health professionals reflect international guideline recommended care; however, they identified a number of additional factors focusing on where patients should be treated, the importance of clear communication and the need for multidisciplinary care which were not included in current clinical practice guidelines. Differences in priorities between specialty groups were also identified.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/154385