Application of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method to evaluate an informative system for liver transplantation in adult and pediatric recipients.

The Delphi Method (DM) is the most frequently used technique to acquire structured expert-opinion elicitation (EOE). It has been increasingly applied to construct guidelines in medicine and to evaluate the appropriateness of clinical procedures. In this study, the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used as a structured EOE process to evaluate the appropriateness of a dataset concerning liver transplantation in adult and pediatric recipients for an information system funded by the Italian Ministry of Health. The original dataset was obtained using an interdisciplinary pool of regional experts (n = 60). This dataset held 280 items stratified into three groups: I. pretransplant items (n = 123); II. transplant items (n = 65); III. early posttransplant and follow-up items (n = 92). In the second DM round, the dataset was subjected to an extraregional panel of independent experts (n = 9) to assess a score ranging from 1 to 9 on each item based on increasing appropriateness, according to the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Overall agreement, uncertainty, and disagreement between experts was 95.89%, 3.12%, and 0.99%, respectively. For each group, agreement-uncertainty-disagreement were 99.35%/0.65%/0% (group I), 91.53%/5.30%/3.17% (group II), and 96.87%/3.13%/0% (group III), respectively. This study supported the use of a structured EOE process to evaluate the appropriateness of a large dataset for liver transplantation activity.