Recommendations for Updating Fever and Inflammation of Unknown Origin From a Modified Delphi Consensus Panel
Date:
06/10/2024
Topics:
Citation:
Wright WF, Stelmash L, Betrains A, Mulders-Manders CM, Rovers CP, Vanderschueren S, Auwaerter PG; International Fever and Inflammation of Unknown Origin Research Working Group. Recommendations for Updating Fever and Inflammation of Unknown Origin From a Modified Delphi Consensus Panel. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2024 Jun 10;11(7):ofae298. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofae298. PMID: 38966848; PMCID: PMC11222709.
Abstract
Background: Fever of unknown origin (FUO) and inflammation of unknown origin (IUO) are syndromes commonly used as medical diagnoses. Since the existing literature has a mixture of diagnostic approaches, developing consensus-based recommendations would be helpful for clinicians, researchers, and patients.
Methods: A modified Delphi process was performed from October 2022 to July 2023, involving 4 rounds of online surveys and 2 live video conferences. The panel comprised international experts recruited based on peer-reviewed published publications and studies. Results. Among 50 invited experts, 26 (52.0%) agreed to participate. Twenty-three panelists completed round 1 of the survey, 21 completed rounds 2 and 3, 20 completed round 4, and 7 participated in round 5 live video discussions. Of the participants, 18 (78.3%) were academic-based clinicians and researchers, 5 (21.7%) practiced in a community-based hospital, and 6 (26.1%) were female. Consensus was reached on 5 themes: (1) incorporating epidemiologic factors, such as geographic location and travel history; (2) updated criteria for classifying FUO or IUO; (3) initial evaluation approaches; (4) a classification system for diagnoses; and (5) recommendations for judicious limitation of empiric therapies. Experts strongly disagreed with using 2-deoxy-2-[18F] fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography as part of the diagnostic criteria for FUO. There were mixed opinions about the importance of the temperature measurement site, the 3-week minimum illness criterion, the need for a standard definition of relapsing fevers, and the use of similar evaluation strategies for FUO and IUO.
Conclusions: These Delphi-generated consensus-based recommendations offer potential improvements compared with earlier definitions and a guide for clinical practice and future research.
Methods: A modified Delphi process was performed from October 2022 to July 2023, involving 4 rounds of online surveys and 2 live video conferences. The panel comprised international experts recruited based on peer-reviewed published publications and studies. Results. Among 50 invited experts, 26 (52.0%) agreed to participate. Twenty-three panelists completed round 1 of the survey, 21 completed rounds 2 and 3, 20 completed round 4, and 7 participated in round 5 live video discussions. Of the participants, 18 (78.3%) were academic-based clinicians and researchers, 5 (21.7%) practiced in a community-based hospital, and 6 (26.1%) were female. Consensus was reached on 5 themes: (1) incorporating epidemiologic factors, such as geographic location and travel history; (2) updated criteria for classifying FUO or IUO; (3) initial evaluation approaches; (4) a classification system for diagnoses; and (5) recommendations for judicious limitation of empiric therapies. Experts strongly disagreed with using 2-deoxy-2-[18F] fluoro-D-glucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography as part of the diagnostic criteria for FUO. There were mixed opinions about the importance of the temperature measurement site, the 3-week minimum illness criterion, the need for a standard definition of relapsing fevers, and the use of similar evaluation strategies for FUO and IUO.
Conclusions: These Delphi-generated consensus-based recommendations offer potential improvements compared with earlier definitions and a guide for clinical practice and future research.