A Delphi Consensus Study on Undergoing Carotid Endarterectomy: Patient Reported Outcome Measures

Abstract

Objective: Currently, evidence is lacking for disease specific patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for use in atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis (either symptomatic or asymptomatic) submitted to carotid endarterectomy (CEA). This study aimed to obtain expert consensus on the most important items to include in a PROM designed to capture the impact of atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis and its treatment on health related quality of life. Methods: A three round modified Delphi consensus study was performed. A mixed expert Delphi panel of doctors (international panel of dedicated vascular surgeons and neurologists) and patients (either symptomatic or asymptomatic patients meeting criteria for carotid artery revascularisation) was implemented. The aim was to obtain pre-defined consensus on items in four pre-defined domains: generic, quality of life, symptom related, and treatment related. Consensus was reached in rounds two and three with > 70% overall expert agreement. Results: The experts agreed on 23 items (out of 49) which were distributed as follows: five in the generic, six in the quality of life, six in the symptom, and six in the treatment related domain. Interestingly, comparing the items that reached consensus in this study, with the generic and disease specific PROMs previously used in carotid artery disease investigation, the only constant items were “difficulty with walking” and “ability to perform daily activities” included in the symptom domain. Considering the items that reached expert consensus in the additional domains, emphasis was given to the impact of the diagnosis, treatment and follow up, and to fear or concern “about the future” and “about severe stroke”. In the treatment domain emphasis was also attained on the side effects, long term patient satisfaction, and on the information provided regarding treatment options. Discussion: As hard clinical outcomes become increasingly rare, assessment of the impact of CEA becomes increasingly difficult. The consensus reached provides a newly defined disease specific PROM that warrants independent validation in specific populations in the future.