(041) Utilizing the Delphi Consensus Method to Enhance Educational Materials for Healthcare Practitioners: A Case Study with Eylea

Background: This project aimed to update the Eylea Educational Material (EM) for Healthcare Practitioners (HCPs) to reflect recent label changes and observations from a European Union (EU) Post-Authorization Safety Study (PASS), which measured the effectiveness of the distributed EM. The EM update encompassed a two-step process, including input from company internal stakeholders and from a panel of external experts.

Objectives: The primary objective of this project was to create an updated version of the EM for Eylea using consensus. The Delphi method is a systematic process for developing and measuring consensus, used when empirical evidence is limited or contradictory. Individuals can express their own opinions as opposed to “group think”. Strengths of the method include the speed in which the consensus can be reached in a group with a wide range of expertise.

Methods: A modified Delphi process was used to achieve consensus among invited experts through rounds of surveys and feedback. Five HCPs with diverse focus within ophthalmology were invited to participate. The method involved 2 rounds of anonymous iterative surveys and one non-anonymous meeting to discuss areas of disagreement and finalize the consensus. An online platform was used to facilitate interactions with the experts. Survey questionnaires included quantitative and qualitative questions. Consensus was defined as 80% and median 4 or higher agreement using a 5-point Likert-type scale. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics.

Results: Consensus was reached in the first round on the usefulness and clarity of the information provided in all sections of the EM, except for "Important safety information about Eylea." A second round focused on modifications to this section, resulting in achieved consensus. Experts provided many relevant comments that were implemented into the EM. A final non-anonymous online meeting helped to address remaining matters and reach verbal consensus on key messages of the EM.

Conclusions: The modified Delphi method successfully facilitated consensus among experts, resulting in a version of the EM that reflects clinical practice and addresses the need for improved knowledge among HCPs regarding the use of Eylea. The engagement and quality of feedback from the expert panel exceeded expectations and highlighted the value of expert input in creating educational materials for HCPs.