-
Scandinavian Journal of Trauma,... May 2021Retrospective trauma scores are often used to categorise trauma, however, they have little utility in the prehospital or hyper-acute setting and do not define major...
INTRODUCTION
Retrospective trauma scores are often used to categorise trauma, however, they have little utility in the prehospital or hyper-acute setting and do not define major trauma to non-specialists. This study employed a Delphi process in order to gauge degrees of consensus/disagreement amongst expert panel members to define major trauma.
METHOD
A two round modified Delphi technique was used to explore subject-expert consensus and identify variables to define major trauma through systematically collating questionnaire responses. After initial descriptive analysis of variables, Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to determine statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in response to the Delphi statements between professional groups. A hierarchical cluster analysis was undertaken to identify patterns of similarity/difference of response. A grounded theory approach to qualitative analysis of data allowed for potentially multiple iterations of the Delphi process to be influenced by identified themes.
RESULTS
Of 55 expert panel members invited to participate, round 1 had 43 participants (Doctor n = 20, Paramedic n = 20, Nurse n = 5, other n = 2). No consistent patterns of opinion emerged with regards to professional group. Cluster analysis identified three patterns of similar responses and coded as trauma minimisers, the middle ground and the risk averse. Round 2 had 35 respondents with minimum change in opinion between rounds. Consensus of > 70% was achieved on many variables which included the identification of life/limb threatening injuries, deranged physiology, need for intensive care interventions and that extremes of age need special consideration. It was also acknowledged that retrospective injury severity scoring has a role to play but is not the only method of defining major trauma. Various factors had a majority of agreement/disagreement but did not meet the pre-set criteria of 70% agreement. These included the topics of burns, spinal immobilisation and whether a major trauma centre is the only place where major trauma can be managed.
CONCLUSION
Based upon the output of this Delphi study, major trauma may be defined as: "Significant injury or injuries that have potential to be life-threatening or life-changing sustained from either high energy mechanisms or low energy mechanisms in those rendered vulnerable by extremes of age".
Topics: Consensus; Delphi Technique; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Research Design; Retrospective Studies; Wounds and Injuries
PubMed: 33971922
DOI: 10.1186/s13049-021-00870-w -
Supportive Care in Cancer : Official... Dec 2022Cancer supportive care comprises an integrative field of multidisciplinary services necessary for people affected by cancer to manage the impact of their disease and... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Cancer supportive care comprises an integrative field of multidisciplinary services necessary for people affected by cancer to manage the impact of their disease and treatment and achieve optimal health outcomes. The concept of supportive care, largely driven by Margaret Fitch's seminal supportive care framework, was developed with the intent to provide health service planners with a conceptual platform to plan and deliver services. However, over time, this concept has been eroded, impacting implementation and practice of supportive care. This study therefore aimed to examine expert contemporary views of supportive care with the view to refocusing the definition and conceptual framework of cancer supportive care to enhance relevance to present-day cancer care.
METHODS
A two-round online modified reactive Delphi survey was employed to achieve consensus regarding terminology to develop a contemporary conceptual framework. A listing of relevant cancer supportive care terms identified through a scoping review were presented for assessment by experts. Terms that achieved ≥ 75% expert agreement as 'necessary' were then assessed using Theory of Change (ToC) to develop consensus statements and a conceptual framework.
RESULTS
A total of 55 experts in cancer control with experience in developing, advising on, delivering, or receiving supportive care in cancer took part in the Delphi surveys. Expert consensus assessed current terminology via Delphi round 1, with 124 terms deemed relevant and 'necessary' per pre-specified criteria. ToC was applied to consensus terms to develop three key statements of definition, and a comprehensive conceptual framework, which were presented for expert consensus review in Delphi round 2.
CONCLUSION
Finalised definitions and conceptual framework are strongly aligned with relevant international policy and advocacy documents, and strengthen focus on early identification, timely intervention, multidisciplinary collaboration, and end-to-end, cross-sector, cancer supportive care.
Topics: Humans; Delphi Technique; Consensus; Neoplasms; Health Services
PubMed: 36513841
DOI: 10.1007/s00520-022-07501-9 -
Bulletin of the World Health... Jan 2021
Topics: COVID-19; Delphi Technique; Global Health; Humans; Public Health
PubMed: 33658729
DOI: 10.2471/BLT.21.010121 -
Bulletin of the World Health... Jun 2021
Topics: Delphi Technique; Global Health; Humans; Nurses; Public Health
PubMed: 34108748
DOI: 10.2471/BLT.21.010621 -
Bulletin of the World Health... Mar 2021
Topics: Delphi Technique; Global Health; Humans; Public Health
PubMed: 33716337
DOI: 10.2471/BLT.21.010321 -
Rural and Remote Health Nov 2022An adequate healthcare workforce remains essential for the health of rural communities. Strategies to address rural health workforce challenges have often centred on the...
INTRODUCTION
An adequate healthcare workforce remains essential for the health of rural communities. Strategies to address rural health workforce challenges have often centred on the medical and nursing workforce; however, addressing the rural pharmacist workforce also remains critical as they are often the first point of contact for health advice. Initiatives have increased pharmacist supply; however, key issues such as poor attraction, recruitment, and retention to rural areas remain. The aim of this study was to support the recruitment and retention of pharmacists in rural areas of Australia through the development of the Pharmacy Community Apgar Questionnaire (PharmCAQ).
METHODS
A modified Delphi technique was employed to develop the PharmCAQ. A panel of experts were purposively selected. Eight representatives were from organisations with rural experience relevant to the study including the Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia, the Pharmaceutical Society of Australia, the Pharmacy Guild of Australia, the Pharmacy Board of Australia, and a representative of a government health agency, who also leads a hospital pharmacy. Three additional participants included local and international academics with health policy and rural health workforce expertise. All participants participated in three separate focus groups of 45-60 minutes duration, where the review and refinement of factors that drive recruitment and retention of pharmacist were discussed. Face and content validity was achieved through the representatives, while internal consistency was achieved when the tool was piloted among 10 rural pharmacists in rural Victoria.
RESULTS
Fifty key factors that impact the recruitment and retention of pharmacists were identified, developed and succinctly described. All factors were grouped into five classifications: (1) geographic, (2) economic and resources, (3) practice and scope of practice, (4) practice environment and (5) community practice support. After final consensus, the factors and their definitions formed the final questionnaire. Lastly, the reliability of PharmCAQ was determined, with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.852.
CONCLUSION
While the development and use of the Apgar questionnaire for the recruitment and retention of health professionals is not a novel idea, seeking to specifically focus on pharmacists is unique. However, 10 factors were similar to factors associated with rural recruitment and retention of both physicians and nurses; they encompassed geographic, community support, and economic and resource factors. Regardless of similarities or differences between health professions in terms of recruitment and retention, as a mechanism for addressing the worsening health professional shortage currently experienced in rural areas, the PharmCAQ was developed to support the recruitment and retention of the pharmacist workforce in rural areas.
Topics: Humans; Pharmacists; Rural Population; Delphi Technique; Reproducibility of Results; Pharmacy; Surveys and Questionnaires; Victoria
PubMed: 36446135
DOI: 10.22605/RRH7347 -
Health & Social Care in the Community Nov 2022Inequity in health outcomes is pervasive, with poorer health outcomes identified in rural, regional and remote communities. An international call to action emphasises... (Review)
Review
Inequity in health outcomes is pervasive, with poorer health outcomes identified in rural, regional and remote communities. An international call to action emphasises the need for service models adapted for less well-resourced settings. The aim of this study was to identify key elements of a framework for the adaptation of specialist community-based child and family health (CFH) service models for rural and other under-resourced settings. A modified Delphi study was undertaken with a 12-person expert panel in CFH including Australian and international professionals and parents from rural and remote communities. The study was informed by the WHO Framework for Strengthening Health Service Systems building blocks, the outcomes of an integrative review of literature and a Participatory Action Research study. Experts assessed 107 potential elements for service model development and rated them for importance when adapting service models for different contexts. Round 1 of the Delphi generated considerable consensus with 80 of the 107 potential elements identified as necessary for the service model adaptation framework. A further 17 elements for CFH service models were added in round 2. While multiple varied elements are important for adapting CFH service models for diverse settings, some elements had common themes. Experts highlighted the importance of community engagement and participation; utilising both data and local knowledge to develop a robust understanding of the community context; and the need for a flexible approach to funding and modes of service delivery to address barriers to implementation and access.
Topics: Child; Humans; Delphi Technique; Australia; Child Health Services; Community Health Services; Rural Population
PubMed: 36195997
DOI: 10.1111/hsc.14052 -
Chest Mar 2023The diagnosis of constrictive bronchiolitis (CB) in previously deployed individuals, and evaluation of respiratory symptoms more broadly, presents considerable...
BACKGROUND
The diagnosis of constrictive bronchiolitis (CB) in previously deployed individuals, and evaluation of respiratory symptoms more broadly, presents considerable challenges, including using consistent histopathologic criteria and clinical assessments.
RESEARCH QUESTION
What are the recommended diagnostic workup and associated terminology of respiratory symptoms in previously deployed individuals?
STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS
Nineteen experts participated in a three-round modified Delphi study, ranking their level of agreement for each statement with an a priori definition of consensus. Additionally, rank-order voting on the recommended diagnostic approach and terminology was performed.
RESULTS
Twenty-five of 28 statements reached consensus, including the definition of CB as a histologic pattern of lung injury that occurs in some previously deployed individuals while recognizing the importance of considering alternative diagnoses. Consensus statements also identified a diagnostic approach for the previously deployed individual with respiratory symptoms, distinguishing assessments best performed at a local or specialty referral center. Also, deployment-related respiratory disease (DRRD) was proposed as a broad term to subsume a wide range of potential syndromes and conditions identified through noninvasive evaluation or when surgical lung biopsy reveals evidence of multicompartmental lung injury that may include CB.
INTERPRETATION
Using a modified Delphi technique, consensus statements provide a clinical approach to possible CB in previously deployed individuals. Use of DRRD provides a broad descriptor encompassing a range of postdeployment respiratory findings. Additional follow-up of individuals with DRRD is needed to assess disease progression and to define other features of its natural history, which could inform physicians better and lead to evolution in this nosology.
Topics: Humans; Lung Injury; Delphi Technique; Respiratory Tract Diseases; Bronchiolitis Obliterans; Respiration Disorders
PubMed: 36343686
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2022.10.031 -
Seminars in Dialysis 2014A literature review performed by the EXtracorporeal TReatments In Poisoning (EXTRIP) workgroup highlighted deficiencies in the existing literature, especially the... (Review)
Review
A literature review performed by the EXtracorporeal TReatments In Poisoning (EXTRIP) workgroup highlighted deficiencies in the existing literature, especially the reporting of case studies. Although general reporting guidelines exist for case studies, there are none in the specific field of extracorporeal treatments in toxicology. Our goal was to construct and propose a checklist that systematically outlines the minimum essential items to be reported in a case study of poisoned patients undergoing extracorporeal treatments. Through a modified two-round Delphi technique, panelists (mostly chosen from the EXTRIP workgroup) were asked to vote on the pertinence of a set of items to identify those considered minimally essential for reporting complete and accurate case reports. Furthermore, independent raters validated the clarity of each selected items between each round of voting. All case reports containing data on extracorporeal treatments in poisoning published in Medline in 2011 were reviewed during the external validation rounds. Twenty-one panelists (20 from the EXTRIP workgroup and an invited expert on pharmacology reporting guidelines) participated in the modified Delphi technique. This group included journal editors and experts in nephrology, clinical toxicology, critical care medicine, emergency medicine, and clinical pharmacology. Three independent raters participated in the validation rounds. Panelists voted on a total of 144 items in the first round and 137 items in the second round, with response rates of 96.3% and 98.3%, respectively. Twenty case reports were evaluated at each validation round and the independent raters' response rate was 99.6% and 98.8% per validation round. The final checklist consists of 114 items considered essential for case study reporting. This methodology of alternate voting and external validation rounds was useful in developing the first reporting guideline for case studies in the field of extracorporeal treatments in poisoning. We believe that this guideline will improve the completeness and transparency of published case reports and that the systematic aggregation of information from case reports may provide early signals of effectiveness and/or harm, thereby improving healthcare decision-making.
Topics: Delphi Technique; Humans; Poisoning; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Renal Dialysis
PubMed: 24890576
DOI: 10.1111/sdi.12251 -
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research Mar 2022The coronavirus pandemic resulted in unique challenges for podiatrists in Australia. Podiatrists were tasked with having to make triage decisions about face-to-face care... (Review)
Review
Development and use of the PodEssential and Paeds-PodEssential triage tools to define "essential" podiatry services. A Delphi survey, scoping review, and face validity testing study.
BACKGROUND
The coronavirus pandemic resulted in unique challenges for podiatrists in Australia. Podiatrists were tasked with having to make triage decisions about face-to-face care without clear guidelines. This research aimed to develop podiatry triage tools to understand individual risk for adults and children, and explore the face validity of both tools.
METHODS
An online three-round modified Delphi technique was used to elicit podiatrists' opinions on conditions, assessments and social factors that elevate risk. Additional elements of known foot and/or leg risk were informed by a synchronous scoping review. Australian podiatrists who held a clinical role treating patients or directly managing podiatrists treating patients within the past six months were recruited. Where 70% of participants reported the same or similar theme in Round 1, statements were accepted with consensus. Where 50-69% of participants reported a similar theme, these were returned to participants to rate agreement using a four-point Likert agreement scale. Statements identified in the scoping review were added at Round 2, if not already identified by participants. The final round presented participants with triage tools, and a series of mock patient scenarios.. Participants were asked to indicate if they would or would not provide face to face podiatry service based on these scenarios.
RESULTS
There were 40 participants who responded to Round 1 (Adult presentations), of these, 23 participants also provided paediatric presentation responses. Participants developed and agreed upon 20 statements about risk in podiatry service delivery for both adults and children across Rounds 1 and 2. The PodEssential and Paed-PodEssential were developed based on these statements indicating stand-alone condition risk (tier 1), elements that should elevate risk (in the absence of a stand-alone condition) (tier 2), and assessments results identifiying a limb at risk (tier 3) in adults and children respectively. Participants utilising these tools in Round 3 more frequently indicated face-to-face service when mock patient scenarios included a greater number elements, suggesting the tool can be useful in making triage decisions.
CONCLUSION
The PodEssential and Paeds-PodEssential tools direct conditions requiring urgent attention as well as providing considered elements to a person's health status to assist in making triage decisions.
Topics: Adult; Australia; Child; Consensus; Delphi Technique; Humans; Podiatry; Reproducibility of Results; Triage
PubMed: 35260188
DOI: 10.1186/s13047-022-00525-8