Desai, Ketan

OBJECTIVE Core outcome sets (COSs) are needed to promote data consistency across studies as well as data synthesis and comparability. The aim of the current study was to use a modified Delphi process to develop a COS for lateral femoral cutaneous neuropathy (LFCN), hereafter COS-LFCN. METHODS A 5-stage approach was used to develop the COS-LFCN: 1) consortium development, 2) literature review to identify potential outcome measures, 3) Delphi survey to develop consensus on outcomes for inclusion, 4) Delphi survey to develop definitions, and 5) consensus meeting to finalize the COS and definitions. This study followed the Core Outcome Set - STAndards for Development, (COS-STAD) recommendations. RESULTS The Core Outcomes in Nerve Surgery (COINS) Consortium comprised 25 participants, all neurological surgeons, representing 14 countries. The final COS-LFCN consisted of 41 factors and outcomes covering domains of demographics, diagnostics, patient-reported outcomes, motor/sensory outcomes, and complications. Appropriate instruments, methods of testing, and definitions were set. The consensus minimum duration of follow-up was 12 months, with the consensus optimal time points for assessment being preoperatively and 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS The COINS Consortium developed a consensus COS for LFCN and provided definitions, methods of implementation, and time points for assessment. The COS-LFCN should serve as the minimum data to be collected in all future neurosurgical studies on LFCN. Incorporation of this COS will help improve consistency in reporting, data synthesis and comparability, and minimize outcome reporting bias.

OBJECTIVE Core outcome sets (COSs) are needed to promote data consistency across studies as well as data synthesis and comparability. The goal of the current study was to utilize a modified Delphi process to develop a COS–sciatic injury and neuropathy evaluation (COS-SINE). METHODS A five-stage approach was utilized to develop the COS-SINE: stage 1, consortium development; stage 2, literature review to identify potential outcome measures; stage 3, Delphi survey to develop consensus on outcomes for inclusion; stage 4, Delphi survey to develop definitions; and stage 5, consensus meeting to finalize the COS and definitions. The study followed the Core Outcome Set–STAndards for Development recommendations. RESULTS The Core Outcomes in Nerve Surgery (COINS) Consortium comprised 23 participants, all neurological surgeons, representing 13 countries. Three participants were excluded on the basis of agreed upon participation rules. The final COS-SINE consisted of 36 data points/outcomes covering the domains of demographics, diagnostics, patient-reported outcomes, motor and sensory outcomes, and complications. Appropriate instruments, methods of testing, and definitions were set. The consensus minimum duration of follow-up was 24 months, with consensus optimal time points for assessment identified as preoperatively and 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS The COINS Consortium developed a consensus COS and provided definitions, methods of implementation, and time points for assessment. The COS-SINE should serve as a minimum set of data that should be collected in all future neurosurgical studies on sciatic nerve injury and neuropathy. Incorporation of this COS should help improve consistency in reporting and data synthesis and comparability and should minimize outcome-reporting bias.

OBJECTIVE Common peroneal (fibular) neuropathy is the most common mononeuropathy of the lower extremity. Despite this, there are surprisingly few studies on the topic, and a knowledge gap remains in the literature. As one attempts to address this knowledge gap, a core outcome set (COS) is needed to guide the planning phases of future studies to allow synthesis and comparability of these studies. The objective of this study was to develop the COS–common peroneal neuropathy (CoPe) using a modified Delphi approach. METHODS A 5-stage approach was used to develop the COS-CoPe: 1) stage 1, consortium development; 2) stage 2, a literature review to identify potential outcome measures; 3) stage 3, a Delphi survey to develop consensus on outcomes for inclusion; 4) stage 4, a Delphi survey to develop definitions; and 5) stage 5, a consensus meeting to finalize COS and definitions. The study followed the COS–STAndards for Development (COS-STAD) recommendations. RESULTS The Core Outcomes in Nerve Surgery (COINS) Consortium comprised 23 participants, all neurological surgeons, representing 13 countries. The final COS-CoPe consisted of 31 data points/outcomes covering domains of demographics, diagnostics, patient-reported outcomes, motor/sensory outcomes, and complications. Appropriate instruments, methods of testing, and definitions were set. The consensus minimum duration of follow-up was 12 months. The consensus optimal time points for assessment were preoperatively and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS The COINS Consortium developed a consensus COS and provided definitions, methods of implementation, and time points for assessment. The COS-CoPe should serve as a minimum set of data that should be collected in all future neurosurgical studies on common peroneal neuropathy. Incorporation of this COS should help improve consistency in reporting, data synthesis, and comparability, and should minimize outcome reporting bias.

OBJECTIVE When considering traumatic brachial plexus and upper extremity nerve injuries, iatrogenic nerve injuries, and nontraumatic nerve injuries, brachial plexus and upper extremity nerve injuries are commonly encountered in clinical practice. Despite this, data synthesis and comparison of available studies are difficult. This is at least in part due to the lack of standardization in reporting and a lack of a core outcome set (COS). Thus, there is a need for a COS for adult brachial plexus and upper extremity nerve injuries (COS-BPUE). The objective of this study was to develop a COS-BPUE using a modified Delphi approach. METHODS A 5-stage approach was used to develop the COS-BPUE: 1) consortium development, 2) literature review to identify potential outcome measures, 3) Delphi survey to develop consensus on outcomes for inclusion, 4) Delphi survey to develop definitions, and 5) consensus meeting to finalize the COS and definitions. The study followed the Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development (COS-STAD) recommendations. RESULTS The Core Outcomes in Nerve Surgery (COINS) Consortium comprised 23 participants, all neurological surgeons, representing 13 countries. The final COS-BPUE consisted of 36 data points/outcomes covering demographic, diagnostic, patient-reported outcome, motor/sensory outcome, and complication domains. Appropriate instruments, methods of testing, and definitions were set. The consensus minimum duration of follow-up was 24 months, with the consensus optimal time points for assessment being preoperatively and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS The COINS Consortium developed a consensus COS and provided definitions, methods of implementation, and time points for assessment. The COS-BPUE should serve as a minimum set of data that should be collected in all future neurosurgical studies on adult brachial plexus and upper extremity nerve injuries. Incorporation of this COS should help improve consistency in reporting, data synthesis, and comparability, and should minimize outcome reporting bias.

An expert opinion study was designed to query five countries and six brachial plexus surgeons regarding the demographics, mechanisms of injury, evaluation, timing of surgery, reconstructive strategies and controversies in adult traumatic pan brachial plexus injuries. Variations in assessing outcomes, management of neuropathic pain and future considerations were elucidated. Clear differences in regional demographics, mechanisms of injury, patient evaluation and treatment strategies were identified. The role of phrenic nerve and contralateral C7 transfer, acute use of free functioning muscle transfers, root reimplantation and amputation/myoelectric prosthetic fitting were regional/surgeon dependent. Comparison of outcomes across regions requires an understanding of the regional nuances of patient demographics, injury mechanisms, preferred reconstructive strategies and how outcomes are measured. Future studies are required to allow accurate regional comparisons.