Development of an Instrument to Assess the Quality of Acupuncture: Results from a Delphi Process
Development of an Instrument to Assess the Quality of Acupuncture: Results from a Delphi Process
复制标题
DOI：
10.1089/acm.2010.0457
复制
发表时间：
2011-05-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Bensoussan, Alan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Smith, Caroline A.;Zaslawski, Christopher J.;Bensoussan, Alan
背景：针灸质量影响临床研究的结果，在随机对照试验中与有效应用针灸有关的问题需要在评估研究时解决。目的：研究目的：在包括在评估临床研究中针灸质量的评价表的领域和项目上达成共识。研究设计和对象：一个活跃的澳大利亚针灸研究小组最初确定了一个评估质量的项目库。然后使用德尔菲共识过程来选择和减少项目数量，并邀请了另一个由42名研究人员组成的专家小组参加。参与者最初按照德尔福第一轮的五分制对项目进行排名，并在第二轮中表明同意或不同意的反应。项目必须达到80%以上的符合率才能进入第二轮。结果：32名专家同意参加这项研究。经过两轮德尔菲过程，在与质量针灸相关的14个领域和26个项目上达成共识。与研究设计相关的领域、项目和最低标准；干预的基本原理；与针刺刺激相关的标准(手动或电刺激)；治疗时间和频率；以及从业者培训。结论：确定了用于评估临床研究中针灸质量的工具中的项目。该工具的进一步开发工作正在进行中，包括物品的相对加权和可靠性测试。
Background: Quality acupuncture influences the outcomes of clinical research, and issues associated with effective administration of acupuncture in randomized controlled trials need to be addressed when appraising studies.Objective: The study objective was to achieve consensus on domains and items for inclusion in a rating scale to assess quality acupuncture administered in clinical research.Study design and subjects: An active group of Australian acupuncture researchers initially identified a pool of items assessing quality. The Delphi consensus process was then used to select and reduce the number of items, and an additional expert panel of 42 researchers were invited to participate. Participants initially ranked items along a five-point scale for the first Delphi round, and indicated an agree or disagree response during the second round. For an item to be retained into the second round, an item had to attain greater than 80% agreement that the item described a dimension of quality acupuncture and related study design.Results: Thirty-two (32) experts agreed to participate in the study. After two rounds of the Delphi process, consensus was reached on 14 domains and 26 items relating to quality acupuncture. Domains, items, and minimum standards related to study design; rationale of the intervention; criteria relating to needling stimulation either manual or electrostimulation; duration and frequency of treatment; and practitioner training.Conclusions: Items for inclusion in an instrument to assess quality acupuncture in clinical research were identified. Further development of the instrument including relative weighting of items and reliability testing is under way.