Abstract
Design: A modified Delphi process was used to assess agreement among health professionals with expertise or experience in FASD screening or diagnosis. An online survey, which included 36 Likert statements on diagnostic methods, was administered over two survey rounds. For fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS), health professionals were presented with concepts from the Institute of Medicine (IOM), University of Washington (UW), Centers for Disease Control (CDC), revised IOM and Canadian diagnostic criteria. For partial FAS (PFAS), alcohol-related neurodevelopmental disorder (ARND), and alcohol-related birth defects (ARBD), concepts based on the IOM and the Canadian diagnostic criteria were compared. Setting/participants: 130 Australian and 9 international health professionals.
Results: Of 139 health professionals invited to complete the survey, 103 (74.1%) responded, and 74 (53.2%) completed one or more questions on diagnostic criteria. We found consensus agreement among participants on the diagnostic criteria for FAS, with the UW criteria most commonly endorsed when compared with all other published criteria for FAS. When health professionals were presented with concepts based on the Canadian and IOM diagnostic criteria, we found consensus agreement but no clear preference for either the Canadian or IOM criteria for the diagnosis of PFAS, and no consensus agreement on diagnostic criteria for ARND. We also found no consensus on the IOM diagnostic criteria for ARBD.
Conclusions: Participants indicated clear support for use of the UW diagnostic criteria for FAS in Australia. These findings should be used to develop guidelines to facilitate improved awareness of, and address identified gaps in the infrastructure for, FASD diagnosis in Australia.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1-9 |
| Number of pages | 9 |
| Journal | BMJ Open |
| Volume | 2 |
| Issue number | 5 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2012 |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Consensus diagnostic criteria for fetal alcohol spectrum disorders in Australia : a modified Delphi study. / Watkins, Rochelle; Elliott, Elizabeth; Mutch, Raewyn; Payne, Janet; Jones, Heather; Latimer, Jane; Russell, Elizabeth; Fitzpatrick, James; Hayes, Lorian; Burns, Lucinda; Halliday, Jane; D'Antoine, Heather; Wilkins, Amanda; Peadon, Elizabeth; Miers, Sue; Carter, Maureen; O'Leary, Colleen; McKenzie, Anne; Bower, Carol.
In: BMJ Open, Vol. 2, No. 5, 2012, p. 1-9.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Consensus diagnostic criteria for fetal alcohol spectrum disorders in Australia
T2 - a modified Delphi study
AU - Watkins, Rochelle
AU - Elliott, Elizabeth
AU - Mutch, Raewyn
AU - Payne, Janet
AU - Jones, Heather
AU - Latimer, Jane
AU - Russell, Elizabeth
AU - Fitzpatrick, James
AU - Hayes, Lorian
AU - Burns, Lucinda
AU - Halliday, Jane
AU - D'Antoine, Heather
AU - Wilkins, Amanda
AU - Peadon, Elizabeth
AU - Miers, Sue
AU - Carter, Maureen
AU - O'Leary, Colleen
AU - McKenzie, Anne
AU - Bower, Carol
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - Objective: To evaluate health professionals' agreement with components of published diagnostic criteria for fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) in order to guide the development of standard diagnostic guidelines for Australia. Design: A modified Delphi process was used to assess agreement among health professionals with expertise or experience in FASD screening or diagnosis. An online survey, which included 36 Likert statements on diagnostic methods, was administered over two survey rounds. For fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS), health professionals were presented with concepts from the Institute of Medicine (IOM), University of Washington (UW), Centers for Disease Control (CDC), revised IOM and Canadian diagnostic criteria. For partial FAS (PFAS), alcohol-related neurodevelopmental disorder (ARND), and alcohol-related birth defects (ARBD), concepts based on the IOM and the Canadian diagnostic criteria were compared. Setting/participants: 130 Australian and 9 international health professionals. Results: Of 139 health professionals invited to complete the survey, 103 (74.1%) responded, and 74 (53.2%) completed one or more questions on diagnostic criteria. We found consensus agreement among participants on the diagnostic criteria for FAS, with the UW criteria most commonly endorsed when compared with all other published criteria for FAS. When health professionals were presented with concepts based on the Canadian and IOM diagnostic criteria, we found consensus agreement but no clear preference for either the Canadian or IOM criteria for the diagnosis of PFAS, and no consensus agreement on diagnostic criteria for ARND. We also found no consensus on the IOM diagnostic criteria for ARBD. Conclusions: Participants indicated clear support for use of the UW diagnostic criteria for FAS in Australia. These findings should be used to develop guidelines to facilitate improved awareness of, and address identified gaps in the infrastructure for, FASD diagnosis in Australia.
AB - Objective: To evaluate health professionals' agreement with components of published diagnostic criteria for fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASD) in order to guide the development of standard diagnostic guidelines for Australia. Design: A modified Delphi process was used to assess agreement among health professionals with expertise or experience in FASD screening or diagnosis. An online survey, which included 36 Likert statements on diagnostic methods, was administered over two survey rounds. For fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS), health professionals were presented with concepts from the Institute of Medicine (IOM), University of Washington (UW), Centers for Disease Control (CDC), revised IOM and Canadian diagnostic criteria. For partial FAS (PFAS), alcohol-related neurodevelopmental disorder (ARND), and alcohol-related birth defects (ARBD), concepts based on the IOM and the Canadian diagnostic criteria were compared. Setting/participants: 130 Australian and 9 international health professionals. Results: Of 139 health professionals invited to complete the survey, 103 (74.1%) responded, and 74 (53.2%) completed one or more questions on diagnostic criteria. We found consensus agreement among participants on the diagnostic criteria for FAS, with the UW criteria most commonly endorsed when compared with all other published criteria for FAS. When health professionals were presented with concepts based on the Canadian and IOM diagnostic criteria, we found consensus agreement but no clear preference for either the Canadian or IOM criteria for the diagnosis of PFAS, and no consensus agreement on diagnostic criteria for ARND. We also found no consensus on the IOM diagnostic criteria for ARBD. Conclusions: Participants indicated clear support for use of the UW diagnostic criteria for FAS in Australia. These findings should be used to develop guidelines to facilitate improved awareness of, and address identified gaps in the infrastructure for, FASD diagnosis in Australia.
KW - alcohol related birth defect
KW - alcohol related neurodevelopmental disorder
KW - article
KW - Australia
KW - consensus development
KW - controlled study
KW - Delphi study
KW - diagnostic procedure
KW - disease classification
KW - female
KW - fetal alcohol syndrome
KW - health practitioner
KW - health survey
KW - human
KW - major clinical study
KW - male
KW - online analysis
KW - organization
KW - partial fetal alcohol syndrome
KW - practice guideline
KW - publishing
U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001918
DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001918
M3 - Article
VL - 2
SP - 1
EP - 9
JO - BMJ Open
JF - BMJ Open
SN - 2044-6055
IS - 5
ER -