Consensus technologies in the analysis of guidelines: international experience of application of Delphi method in anesthesiology and intensive care. Systematic review
PDF_2021-1_90-106 (Русский)
HTML_2021-1_90-106 (Русский)


Delphi Studies
Delphi method
Medical Decision-Making
intensive care
Consensus development methods

How to Cite

Zabolotskikh IB, Grigoryev SV, Belkin AA, Lakhin RE Consensus technologies in the analysis of guidelines: international experience of application of Delphi method in anesthesiology and intensive care. Systematic review. Annals of Critical Care. 2021;(1):90–106. doi:10.21320/1818-474X-2021-1-90-106.


Abstract Views: 8
PDF_2021-1_90-106 (Русский) Downloads: 1
HTML_2021-1_90-106 (Русский) Downloads: 0
Plum Analytics


English Русский

Social Networks




Introduction. To perform research aimed at solving problems, checking existing and formulating new hypotheses, making decisions or judging on any problem, the Delphi method and its modifications are often used. In recent years, the use of this method in research in various fields of medicine is gaining popularity; nevertheless, the technique is rarely used in domestic practice.

Objectives. To describe the features of the application of the Delphi method in the expert assessment of recommendations and to evaluate its application in anesthesia and intensive care.

Materials and methods. The publications were searched in the electronic databases PubMed and RSCI. Date of last search query is January 15, 2021. The search was carried out using the keywords “clinical practice”, “anesthesia intensive care guidelines”, “clinical practice guidelines”, “anesthesia intensive care guidelines”, “Delphi method”.

Results. This review describes the principles of the Delphi method, its advantages and limitations, provides examples of its use in clinical trials and in the analysis and development of recommendations in relation to anesthesiology and intensive care. The example of the analysis of recommendations shows the implementation of the quality assessment of the provisions being developed.

Conclusions. The Delphi method can be used to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the diagnostic and treatment methods proposed in the framework of the recommendations.
PDF_2021-1_90-106 (Русский)
HTML_2021-1_90-106 (Русский)


  1. Dalkey N.C., Helmer O. An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Management Science 1963; 9: 458–467.
  2. Delbecq A., Van de Ven A. A group process model for problem identification and program planning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 1971; 7: 467–492.
  3. Fink A., Kosecoff J., Chassin M., Brook R.H. Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for use. Am J Public Health. 1984; 7 4(9): 979–983. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.74.9.979
  4. McMillan S.S., King M., Tully M.P. How to use the nominal group and Delphi techniques. Int J Clin Pharm. 2016; 38(3): 655–662. DOI: 10.1007/s11096-016-0257-x
  5. Заболотских И.Б., Григорьев С.В., Белкин А.А., Лахин Р.Е. Технологии консенсуса при экспертизе рекомендаций. Вестник интенсивной терапии им.А.И. Салтанова. 2020; 4: 8–11. [Zabolotskikh I.B., Grigoryev S.V., Belkin A.A., Lakhin R.E. Consensus technologies in the analysis of guidelines. Annals of Critical Care. 2020; 4: 8–11. (In Russ)] DOI: 10.21320/1818-474X-2020-4-8-11
  6. Miller L.E. Determining what could/should be: The Delphi technique and its application. Paper presented at the meeting of the 2006 annual meeting of the Mid-Western Educational Research Association, Columbus, Ohio.
  7. Diamond I.R. et al. Defining consensus: A systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of Delphi studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2014; 67: 401–409.
  8. Rayens M.K., Hahn E.J. Building Consensus Using the Policy Delphi Method. Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice. 2000: 308–315.
  9. Black, N., Murphy, M., Lamping, D., et al. Consensus Development Methods: A Review of Best Practice in Creating Clinical Guidelines. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. 1999; 4(4): 236–248. DOI: 10.1177/135581969900400410
  10. Hsu C.C., Sandford B.A. The Delphi Technique: Making Sense Of Consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 2007; 12(10): 1–8.
  11. Turoff M. The design of a policy Delphi. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 1970; 2: 149–171.
  12. Shanteau J. How much information does an expert use? Is it relevant? Acta Psychologica. 1992; 81: 75–86.
  13. Ab Latif R., Dahlan A., Ab Mulud Z., Mat Nor M.Z. The Delphi technique as a method to obtain consensus in health care education research. Education in Medicine Journal. 2017; 9(3): 89–102. DOI: 10.21315/eimj2017.9.3.10
  14. Linstone H.A., Turoff M. The Delphi survey: method techniques and applications. Reading: Addison-Wesley; 1975.
  15. Hasson F., Keeney S., McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs. 2000; 32(4): 1008–1015.
  16. Vinokur A., Burnstein E., Sechrest L., Wortman P.M. Group decision making by experts: field study of panels evaluating medical technologies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1985; 49: 70–84.
  17. Delbecq A.L., Van de Ven A. H., Gustafson D.H. (1975). Group techniques for program planning. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, and Co.
  18. Davis J.H. Some compelling intuitions about group consensus decisions, theoretical and empirical research, and interpersonal aggregation phenomena: selected examples, 1950–1990. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1992; 52: 3–38.
  19. Campbell S.M., Cantrill J.A. Consensus methods in prescribing research. J Clin Pharm Ther. 2001; 26(1): 5–14.
  20. Black N., Murphy M., Lamping D., et al. Consensus development methods: a review of best practice in creating clinical guidelines. J Health Serv Res Policy. 1999; 4(4): 236–248.
  21. Prinsen C.A., Vohra S., Rose M.R., et al. How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” — a practical guideline. Trials. 2016; 17(1): DOI: 10.1186/s13063-016-1555-2
  22. Sauvegrain P., Chantry A.A., Chiesa-Dubruille C., et al. Monitoring quality of obstetric care from hospital discharge databases: A Delphi survey to propose a new set of indicators based on maternal health outcomes. PLoS One. 2019; 14(2): e0211955. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211955
  23. Bonnemaizon A., Cova B., Louyot M.-C. Relationship Marketing in 2015: A Delphi Approach European Management Journal. 2007; 25(1): 50–59. DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2006.12.002
  24. Ziglio E. The Delphi method and its contributions to decision making. In: Adler M., Ziglio E., editors. Gazing into the Oracle: the Delphi method and its application to social policy and public health. London: Jessica Kingley Publishers,
  25. Adams M.K. Defining creative scholarship and identifying criteria for evaluating creative scholarship using a modified Delphi technique [dissertation]. Graduate school, University of Wyoming, Wyoming,
  26. Choong Y.C. A mapping approach to investigating information and communication technology (ICT) implementation during the building design process [dissertation]. School of Property, Construction and project management, RMIT University,
  27. Ludwig B. Predicting the future: Have you considered using the Delphi methodology? Journal of Extension, 1997: 35(5): 1–4. Retrieved November 2005 from
  28. Witkin B.R., Altschuld J.W. Planning and conducting needs assessment: A practical guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. 1995.
  29. Giannarou L., Zervas E. Using Delphi technique to build consensus in practice International Journal of Business Science and Applied Management. 2014; 9(2): 65–82.
  30. Ulschak F.L. Human resource development: The theory and practice of need assessment. Reston, VA: Reston Publishing Company, Inc, 1983.
  31. Likert R. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychology. 1932; 22(140):
  32. Brown J.D. Likert items and scales of measurement? SHIKEN: JALT Testing & Evaluation SIG Newsletter. 2011; 15(1): 10–14.
  33. Sullivan G.M., Artino A.R. Jr. Analyzing and interpreting data from likert-type scales. J Grad Med Educ. 2013; 5(4): 541–542. DOI: 10.4300/JGME-5-4-18
  34. Geist M.R. Using the Delphi method to engage stakeholders: A comparison of two studies. Evaluation and Program Planning. 2010; 33: 147–154.
  35. Dalkey N.C. The Delphi method: an experimental study of group opinion. In: Dalkey N.C., Rourke D.L., Lewis R., Snyder D., editors. Studies in the quality of life: Delphi and decision-making. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1972: 13–54.
  36. McKenna H.P. The Delphi technique: a worthwhile approach for nursing? Journal of Advanced Nursing. 1994; 19: 1221–1225.
  37. Loughlin K., Moore L. Using Delphi to achieve congruent objectives and activities in a pediatrics department. Journal of Medical Education. 1979; 54: 101–106.
  38. Sumsion T. The Delphi technique: an adaptive research tool. British Journal of Occupational Therapy. 1998; 61(4): 153–156.
  39. Green B., Jones M., Hughes D., Willimas A. Applying the Delphi technique in a study of GP’s information requirements. Health and Social Care in the Community. 1999; 7(3): 198–205.
  40. Scheibe M., Skutsch M., Schofer J. Experiments in Delphi methodology. In H.A. Linstone, & M. Turoff (Eds.). The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1975: 262–287.
  41. Green P.J. The content of a college-level outdoor leadership course. Paper presented at the Conference of the Northwest District Association for the American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, Spokane, WA, 1982.
  42. Prescribing indicators for UK general practice: Delphi consultation study Stephen M. Campbell, Judy A. Cantrill, Dave Roberts. BMJ. 2000; 321: 1–5.
  43. Andrews P.J.D., Verma V., Healy M., et al. Targeted temperature management in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage, subarachnoid haemorrhage, or acute ischaemic stroke: consensus recommendations. Br J Anaesth. 2018; 121(4): 768–775. DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2018.06.018
  44. Barnes J., Hunter J., Harris S., et al. Systematic review and consensus definitions for the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative: infection and sepsis. Br J Anaesth. 2019; 122(4): 500–508. DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2019.01.009
  45. Gillies M.A., Sander M., Shaw A., et al. Current research priorities in perioperative intensive care medicine. Intensive Care Med. 2017; 43(9): 1173–1186. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-017-4848-3
  46. Griffiths S.V., Conway D.H., POPC-CB Investigators, et al. What are the optimum components in a care bundle aimed at reducing post-operative pulmonary complications in high-risk patients? Perioper Med (Lond). 2018; 7:7. DOI: 10.1186/s13741-018-0084-9
  47. Hopkins P.M., Cooke P.J., Clarke R.C., et al. Consensus clinical scoring for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. Br J Anaesth. 2019; 123(1): e29–e37. DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2019.02.029
  48. Huijben J.A., Wiegers E.J.A., de Keizer N.F., et al. Development of a quality indicator set to measure and improve quality of ICU care for patients with traumatic brain injury. Crit Care. 2019; 23(1): 95. DOI: 10.1186/s13054-019-2377-x
  49. Kallen M.C., Roos-Blom M.J., Dongelmans D.A., et al. Development of actionable quality indicators and an action implementation toolbox for appropriate antibiotic use at intensive care units: A modified-RAND Delphi study. PLoS One. 2018; 13(11): e0207991. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207991
  50. Mclennan J.V., Mackway-Jones K.C., Horne S.T., Body R. Predictors of massive blood transfusion: a Delphi Study to examine the views of experts. J R Army Med Corps. 2017; 163(4): 259–265. DOI: 10.1136/jramc-2016-000702
  51. Moonesinghe S.R., Jackson A.I.R., Boney O., et al. Systematic review and consensus definitions for the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine initiative: patient-centred outcomes. Br J Anaesth. 2019; 123(5): 664–670. DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2019.07.020
  52. Myles P.S., Boney O., Botti M., et al. Systematic review and consensus definitions for the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative: patient comfort. Br J Anaesth. 2018; 120(4): 705–711. DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2017.12.037
  53. Pomponio G., Tedesco S., Peghetti A., et al. Improving the quality of clinical research on chronic wound infection treatment: expert-based recommendations. J Wound Care. 2019; 28(Supl.): S26–S31. DOI: 10.12968/jowc.2019.28.Sup1.S26
  54. Rankin A., Cadogan C.A., In Ryan C., et al. Core Outcome Set for Trials Aimed at Improving the Appropriateness of Polypharmacy in Older People in Primary Care. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018; 66(6): 1206–1212. DOI: 10.1111/jgs.15245
  55. Rewa O.G., Eurich D.T., Noel Gibney R.T., Bagshaw S.M. A modified Delphi process to identify, rank and prioritize quality indicators for continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) care in critically ill patients. J Crit Care. 2018; 47: 145–152. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.06.023
  56. Rietjens J.A.C., Sudore R.L., Connolly M., et al. Definition and recommendations for advance care planning: an international consensus supported by the European Association for Palliative Care. Lancet Oncol. 2017; 18(9): e543–e551. DOI: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30582-X
  57. van der Lee L., Hill A.M., Patman S. Expert consensus for respiratory physiotherapy management of mechanically ventilated adults with community-acquired pneumonia: A Delphi study. J Eval Clin Pract. 2019; 25(2): 230–243. DOI: 10.1111/jep.13077
  58. Wassenaar A., van den Boogaard M., Underpin-Icu Study Group, Schoonhoven L., Pickkers P. Determination of the feasibility of a multicomponent intervention program to prevent delirium in the Intensive Care Unit: A modified RAND Delphi study. Aust Crit Care. 2017; 30(6): 321–327. DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2016.12.004
  59. Young C.C., Harris E.M., Vacchiano C., et al. Lung-protective ventilation for the surgical patient: international expert panel-based consensus recommendations. Br J Anaesth. 2019; 123(6): 898–913. DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2019.08.017
  60. Geeraerts T., Velly L., Abdennour L., et al. Management of severe traumatic brain injury (first 24 hours). Anaesth Crit Care Pain Med. 2018; 37(2): 171–186. DOI: 10.1016/j.accpm.2017.12.001
  61. Zaragoza R., Ferrer R., Llinares P., et al. ‘Total quality’ in the management of invasive candidiasis in critically ill patients by analysing the integrated process. Rev Iberoam Micol. 2017; 34(3): 143–157. DOI: 10.1016/j.riam.2017.03.008
  62. Hendrickse A., Crouch C., Sakai T., et al. Service Requirements of Liver Transplant Anesthesia Teams: Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia Recommendations. Liver Transpl. 2020; 26(4): 582–590. DOI: 10.1002/lt.25711
  63. Hawryluk G.W.J., Aguilera S., Buki A., et al. A management algorithm for patients with intracranial pressure monitoring: the Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC). Intensive Care Med. 2019; 45(12): 1783–1794. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-019-05805-9
  64. Akyol M.U., Alden T.D., Amartino H., et al. Recommendations for the management of MPS VI: systematic evidence- and consensus-based guidance. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019; 14(1): 118. DOI: 10.1186/s13023-019-1080-y
  65. Akyol M.U., Alden T.D., Amartino H. Recommendations for the management of MPS IVA: systematic evidence- and consensus-based guidance. Orphanet J Rare Dis. 2019; 14(1): 137. DOI: 10.1186/s13023-019-1074-9
  66. Elke G., Hartl W.H., Kreymann K.G., et al. Clinical Nutrition in Critical Care Medicine — Guideline of the German Society for Nutritional Medicine (DGEM). Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2019; 33: 220–275. DOI: 10.1016/j.clnesp.2019.05.002
  67. Ince C., Boerma E.C., Cecconi M., et al. Second consensus on the assessment of sublingual microcirculation in critically ill patients: results from a task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. Intensive Care Med. 2018; 44(3): 281–299. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-018-5070-7
  68. Oddo M., Poole D., Helbok R., et al. Fluid therapy in neurointensive care patients: ESICM consensus and clinical practice recommendations. Intensive Care Med. 2018; 44(4): 449–463. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-018-5086-z
  69. Reintam Blaser A., Starkopf J., Alhazzani W., et al. Early enteral nutrition in critically ill patients: ESICM clinical practice guidelines. Intensive Care Med. 2017; 43(3): 380–398. DOI: 10.1007/s00134-016-4665-0
  70. Mutters N.T., De Angelis G., Restuccia G., et al. Use of evidence-based recommendations in an antibiotic care bundle for the intensive care unit. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2018; 51(1): 65–70. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2017.06.020
  71. Overton M.J., Smith N.A. Anaesthesia priorities for Australian and New Zealand medical school curricula: a Delphi consensus of academic anaesthetists. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2015; 43(1): 51–58. DOI: 10.1177/0310057X1504300108
  72. Valentine S.L., Nadkarni V.M., Curley M.A., Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference Group. Nonpulmonary treatments for pediatric acute respiratory distress syndrome: proceedings from the Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2015; 16(5 Suppl 1): S73–85. DOI: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000000435
  73. Via G., Hussain A., Wells M., Reardon R., et al. International evidence-based recommendations for focused cardiac ultrasound. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014; 27(7): 683.e1–683.e33. DOI: 10.1016/j.echo.2014.05.001
  74. Speck K., Rawat N., Weiner N.C., et al. A systematic approach for developing a ventilator-associated pneumonia prevention bundle. Am J Infect Control. 2016; 44(6): 652–656. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajic.2015.12.020
  75. Ravesloot M.J.L., de Raaff C.A.L., van de Beek M.J., et al. Perioperative care of patients with obstructive sleep apnea undergoing upper airway surgery: a review and consensus recommendations. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019. DOI: 10.1001/jamaoto.2019.1448
  76. Frankel H.L., Kirkpatrick A.W., Elbarbary M., et al. Guidelines for the Appropriate Use of Bedside General and Cardiac Ultrasonography in the Evaluation of Critically Ill Patients. Part I: General Ultrasonography. Crit Care Med. 2015; 43(11): 2479–2502. DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001216
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2021 ANNALS OF CRITICAL CARE


Download data is not yet available.