TY - JOUR
T1 - Recurrence of Dupuytren's contracture
T2 - A consensus-based definition
AU - Dupuytren Delphi Group
AU - Kan, Hester J.
AU - Verrijp, Frank W.
AU - Hovius, Steven E.R.
AU - Van Nieuwenhoven, Christianne A.
AU - Selles, Ruud W.
AU - Amadio, Peter C.
AU - Degreef, Ilse
AU - Denkler, Keith
AU - Dias, Joseph
AU - Eaton, Charles
AU - Goldfarb, Charles A.
AU - Hentz, Vincent
AU - E Horch, Raymund
AU - Hurst, Lawrence
AU - Jerosch-Herold, Christina
AU - Khouri, Roger K.
AU - Lalonde, Donald
AU - Leclercq, Caroline
AU - McGrouther, Ducan Angus
AU - Nanchahal, Jagdeep
AU - Pelissier, Phillipe
AU - Tonkin, Michael
AU - Werker, Paul M.N.
AU - Wilbrand, Stephan
AU - Zyluk, Andrzej
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Kan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2017/5
Y1 - 2017/5
N2 - Purpose: One of the major determinants of Dupyutren disease (DD) treatment efficacy is recurrence of the contracture. Unfortunately, lack of agreement in the literature on what constitutes recurrence makes it nearly impossible to compare the multiple treatments alternatives available today. The aim of this study is to bring an unbiased pool of experts to agree upon what would be considered a recurrence of DD after treatment; and from that consensus establish a much-needed definition for DD recurrence. Methods: To reach an expert consensus on the definition of recurrence we used the Delphi method and invited 43 Dupuytren's research and treatment experts from 10 countries to participate by answering a series of questionnaire rounds. After each round the answers were analyzed and the experts received a feedback report with another questionnaire round to further hone in of the definition. We defined consensus when at least 70% of the experts agreed on a topic. Results: Twenty-one experts agreed to participate in this study. After four consensus rounds, we agreed that DD recurrence should be defined as "more than 20 degrees of contracture recurrence in any treated joint at one year post-treatment compared to six weeks post-treatment ". In addition, "recurrence should be reported individually for every treated joint" and afterwards measurements should be repeated and reported yearly. Conclusion: This study provides the most comprehensive to date definition of what should be considered recurrence of DD. These standardized criteria should allow us to better evaluate the many treatment alternatives.
AB - Purpose: One of the major determinants of Dupyutren disease (DD) treatment efficacy is recurrence of the contracture. Unfortunately, lack of agreement in the literature on what constitutes recurrence makes it nearly impossible to compare the multiple treatments alternatives available today. The aim of this study is to bring an unbiased pool of experts to agree upon what would be considered a recurrence of DD after treatment; and from that consensus establish a much-needed definition for DD recurrence. Methods: To reach an expert consensus on the definition of recurrence we used the Delphi method and invited 43 Dupuytren's research and treatment experts from 10 countries to participate by answering a series of questionnaire rounds. After each round the answers were analyzed and the experts received a feedback report with another questionnaire round to further hone in of the definition. We defined consensus when at least 70% of the experts agreed on a topic. Results: Twenty-one experts agreed to participate in this study. After four consensus rounds, we agreed that DD recurrence should be defined as "more than 20 degrees of contracture recurrence in any treated joint at one year post-treatment compared to six weeks post-treatment ". In addition, "recurrence should be reported individually for every treated joint" and afterwards measurements should be repeated and reported yearly. Conclusion: This study provides the most comprehensive to date definition of what should be considered recurrence of DD. These standardized criteria should allow us to better evaluate the many treatment alternatives.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85019478980&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0164849
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0164849
M3 - Article
C2 - 28505187
AN - SCOPUS:85019478980
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 12
JO - PloS one
JF - PloS one
IS - 5
M1 - 0164849
ER -