METHODS: An iterative e-Delphi technique was employed as the method for gathering consensus on a range of topics found pertinent to affect orthodontic teaching and learning established through literature review. A total of ten expert panellists were recruited through a targeted invitation to the orthodontists from Malaysian public universities offering undergraduate dental education. The e-Delphi comprised of three rounds of anonymous e-survey. The consensus was sought for two open-ended and two closed-ended questions.

RESULTS: The response rates for all the three rounds were 100 per cent. The total number of questions responded by the participants in all the three rounds was forty-four. Round one achieved consensus on two closed-ended questions. Round two achieved a consensus on twenty-eight out of thirty-four (82.35%) questions with round three achieving a consensus on four out of six (66.66%) questions. A 70% consensus was considered as the minimum level of agreement for all the rounds. In total, consensus and agreement were achieved on two closed-ended questions and twenty-nine items from the open-ended questions.

METHODS: We examined CPGs and UpToDate point-of-care resources on the management of critically ill COVID-19 patients that had been published as of 30 April 2020 and compared them against the CPG by the WHO. The main outcome was the rate of consistency among CPGs for the management of critically ill COVID-19 patients. Sensitivity analyses were conducted by excluding recommendation statements that were described as insufficient evidence and by excluding single CPGs one at a time.

RESULTS: Thirteen reference recommendations derived from the CPG of the WHO were generated using discrete and unambiguous specifications of the population, intervention, and comparison states. Across CPGs, the rate of consistency in direction with the WHO is 7.7%. When insufficient evidence codings were excluded, the rate of consistency increased substantially to 61.5%. The results of a leave-one-out sensitivity analysis suggested that the UpToDate recommendation source could explain the inconsistency. Consistency in direction rates changed by an absolute 23.1% (from 1/13 (7.7%) to 4/13 (30.8%)) if UpToDate was removed.

METHODS: This was a systematic review that was carried out using MeSH terminology in our search protocol in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov and Web of Science database between 1976 and 29th of Jan 2023. All studies that were included in this review had applied fully/partially the SRS inclusion criteria for brace wear. Outcome measures were divided into primary and secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS: 3830 literatures were found in which 176 literatures were deemed relevant to the study once duplicates were removed and titles and abstracts were screened. Of these literatures, only 15 had fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the study. 8 of the studies were Level IV studies, 5 were Level III studies and 2 studies were Level I studies (1 prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) and 1 Quasi-RCT). The percentage of patients who avoided surgery for European braces ranged from 88 to 100%, whereas for Boston brace ranged from 70 to 94%. When treatment success was assessed based on the final Cobb angle > 45°, approximately 15% of patients treated with European braces had treatment failure. In contrast, 20-63% of patients treated with Boston brace had curves > 45° at skeletal maturity. The BrAIST study used a cut-off point of 50° to define failure of treatment and the rate of treatment failure was 28%. Curve correction was not achieved in most patients (24-51% of patients) who were treated with the Chêneau brace and its derivatives. However, none of the patients treated with Boston brace achieved curve correction.

OBJECTIVE: To develop recommendations for RIRS on the basis of existing data and expert consensus.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A protocol-driven, three-phase study was conducted by the European Association of Urology Section of Urolithiasis (EULIS) and the International Alliance of Urolithiasis (IAU). The process included: (1) a nonsystematic review of the literature to define domains for discussion; (2) a two-round modified Delphi survey involving experts in this field; and (3) an additional group meeting and third-round survey involving 64 senior representative members to formulate the final conclusions.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The results from each previous round were returned to the participants for re-evaluation of their decisions during the next round. The agreement threshold was set at 70%.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The panel included 209 participants who developed 29 consensus statements on the following topics of interest: (1) perioperative infection management; (2) perioperative antithrombotic therapy; (3) fundamentals of the operative technique; and (4) standardized outcome reporting. Although this consensus can be considered as a useful reference for more clinically oriented daily practice, we also acknowledge that a higher level of evidence from further clinical trials is needed.

CONCLUSIONS: The consensus statements aim to guide and standardize clinical practice and research on RIRS and to recommend standardized outcome reporting.

AREAS COVERED: Procalcitonin (PCT)-guided antibiotic use was discussed in various clinical conditions across initiation, management, and discontinuation stages. Most experts strongly recommended using PCT-driven antibiotic therapy among patients with lower respiratory tract infections, sepsis, and COVID-19. However, additional research is required to understand the optimal use of PCT in patients with organ transplantation and cancer patients with febrile neutropenia. Implementation of the solutions discussed in this review can help improve PCT utilization in guiding AMS in these regions and reducing challenges.