Research priorities of adult intensive care nurses in 20 European countries: a Delphi study.

Aims: This paper is a report of a three round Delphi study of intensive care nursing research priorities in Europe (October 2006–April 2009).

Background: Internationally, priorities for research in intensive care nursing have received some attention focusing on healthcare interventions and patient needs. Studies as early as the 1980s identified priorities in the United States, United Kingdom, Hong Kong and Australia. Research priorities of intensive care nurses across the European Union are unknown.

Methods: The participants, invited in 2006, included 110 intensive care nurses, managers, educators and researchers from 20 European Critical Care Nursing Associations. Delphi round one was an emailed questionnaire inviting participants to list important areas for research. The list was content analysed and developed into an online questionnaire for rounds two and three. In round two, participants ranked the topics on a scale of 1–6 (not important to extremely important). Mean scores of round two were added to the questionnaire of round three and participants ranked the topics again.

Results: There were 52 research topics in 12 domains. There was a dominance of priorities in five main areas: patient safety; impact of evidence based practice on outcomes; impact of workforce on outcomes; well being of patients and relatives; and impact of end-of-life care on staff and practice.

Conclusions: The results reflect worldwide healthcare concerns and objectives and highlight topics that nurses view as fundamental to the care of critically ill patients. These topics provide a platform for future research efforts to improve clinical practice and care of patients in intensive care.

Consensus statements for management of Barrett's dysplasia and early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, based on a Delphi process

Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA) is increasingly common among patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE). We aimed to provide consensus recommendations based on the medical literature that clinicians could use to manage patients with BE and low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia (HGD), or early-stage EA.

Developing the specifications of an open angle glaucoma screening intervention in the United Kingdom: a Delphi approach.

Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Glaucoma is a leading cause of blindness. Early detection is advocated but there is insufficient evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to inform health policy on population screening. Primarily, there is no agreed screening intervention. For a screening programme, agreement is required on the screening tests to be used, either individually or in combination, the person to deliver the test and the location where testing should take place. This study aimed to use ophthalmologists (who were experienced glaucoma subspecialists), optometrists, ophthalmic nurses and patients to develop a reduced set of potential screening tests and testing arrangements that could then be explored in depth in a further study of their feasibility for evaluation in a glaucoma screening RCT.
METHODS:
A two-round Delphi survey involving 38 participants was conducted. Materials were developed from a prior evidence synthesis. For round one, after some initial priming questions in four domains, specialists were asked to nominate three screening interventions, the intervention being a combination of the four domains; target population, (age and higher risk groups), site, screening test and test operator (provider). More than 250 screening interventions were identified. For round two, responses were condensed into 72 interventions and each was rated by participants on a 0-10 scale in terms of feasibility.
RESULTS:
Using a cut-off of a median rating of feasibility of =5.5 as evidence of agreement of intervention feasibility, six interventions were identified from round 2. These were initiating screening at age 50, with a combination of two or three screening tests (varying combinations of tonometry/measures of visual function/optic nerve damage) organized in a community setting with an ophthalmic trained technical assistant delivering the tests. An alternative intervention was a 'glaucoma risk score' ascertained by questionnaire. The advisory panel recommended that further exploration of the feasibility of screening higher risk populations and detailed specification of the screening tests was required.
CONCLUSIONS:
With systematic use of expert opinions, a shortlist of potential screening interventions was identified. Views of users, service providers and cost-effectiveness modeling are now required to identify a feasible intervention to evaluate in a future glaucoma screening trial.

BOB CAT: a Large-Scale Review and Delphi Consensus for Management of Barrett’s Esophagus With No Dysplasia, Indefinite for, or Low-Grade Dysplasia

OBJECTIVES: Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a common premalignant lesion for which surveillance is recommended. This strategy is limited by considerable variations in clinical practice. We conducted an international, multidisciplinary, systematic search and evidence-based review of BE and provided consensus recommendations for clinical use in patients with nondysplastic, indefinite, and low-grade dysplasia (LGD). METHODS: We defined the scope, proposed statements, and searched electronic databases, yielding 20,558 publications that were screened, selected online, and formed the evidence base. We used a Delphi consensus process, with an 80% agreement threshold, using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to categorize the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. RESULTS: In total, 80% of respondents agreed with 55 of 127 statements in the final voting rounds. Population endoscopic screening is not recommended and screening should target only very high-risk cases of males aged over 60 years with chronic uncontrolled reflux. A new international definition of BE was agreed upon. For any degree of dysplasia, at least two specialist gastrointestinal (GI) pathologists are required. Risk factors for cancer include male gender, length of BE, and central obesity. Endoscopic resection should be used for visible, nodular areas. Surveillance is not recommended for <5 years of life expectancy. Management strategies for indefinite dysplasia (IND) and LGD were identified, including a de-escalation strategy for lower-risk patients and escalation to intervention with follow-up for higher-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this uniquely large consensus process in gastroenterology, we made key clinical recommendations for the escalation/de-escalation of BE in clinical practice. We made strong recommendations for the prioritization of future research.

Core Outcomes in Ventilation Trials (COVenT): protocol for a core outcome set using a Delphi survey with a nested randomised trial and observational cohort study

Background
Among clinical trials of interventions that aim to modify time spent on mechanical ventilation for critically ill patients there is considerable inconsistency in chosen outcomes and how they are measured. The Core Outcomes in Ventilation Trials (COVenT) study aims to develop a set of core outcomes for use in future ventilation trials in mechanically ventilated adults and children.

Methods/design
We will use a mixed methods approach that incorporates a randomised trial nested within a Delphi study and a consensus meeting. Additionally, we will conduct an observational cohort study to evaluate uptake of the core outcome set in published studies at 5 and 10 years following core outcome set publication. The three-round online Delphi study will use a list of outcomes that have been reported previously in a review of ventilation trials. The Delphi panel will include a range of stakeholder groups including patient support groups. The panel will be randomised to one of three feedback methods to assess the impact of the feedback mechanism on subsequent ranking of outcomes. A final consensus meeting will be held with stakeholder representatives to review outcomes.

Discussion
The COVenT study aims to develop a core outcome set for ventilation trials in critical care, explore the best Delphi feedback mechanism for achieving consensus and determine if participation increases use of the core outcome set in the long term.

Consensus on Outcome Measures for Glaucoma Effectiveness Trials: Results From a Delphi and Nominal Group Technique Approaches

PURPOSE: Comparing the relative effectiveness of interventions across glaucoma trials can be problematic due to differences in definitions of outcomes. We sought to identify a key set of clinical outcomes and reach consensus on how best to measure them from the perspective of glaucoma experts.

METHODS: A 2-round electronic Delphi survey was conducted. Round 1 involved 25 items identified from a systematic review. Round 2 was developed based on information gathered in round 1. A 10-point Likert scale was used to quantify importance and consensus of outcomes (7 outcomes) and ways of measuring them (44 measures). Experts were identified through 2 glaucoma societies membership-the UK and Eire Glaucoma Society and the European Glaucoma Society. A Nominal Group Technique (NGT) followed the Delphi process. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS: A total of 65 participants completed round 1 out of 320; of whom 56 completed round 2 (86%). Agreement on the importance of outcomes was reached on 48/51 items (94%). Intraocular pressure (IOP), visual field (VF), safety, and anatomic outcomes were classified as highly important. Regarding methods of measurement of IOP, "mean follow-up IOP" using Goldmann applanation tonometry achieved the highest importance, whereas for evaluating VFs "global index mean deviation/defect (MD)" and "rate of VF progression" were the most important. Retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) thickness measured by optical coherence tomography (OCT) was identified as highly important. The NGT results reached consensus on "change of IOP (mean of 3 consecutive measurements taken at fixed time of day) from baseline," change of VF-MD values (3 reliable VFs at baseline and follow-up visit) from baseline, and change of RNFL thickness (2 good quality OCT images) from baseline.

CONCLUSIONS: Consensus was reached among glaucoma experts on how best to measure IOP, VF, and anatomic outcomes in glaucoma randomized controlled trials.

Defining consensus norms for palliative care of people with intellectual disabilities in Europe using Delphi methods: A White Paper from the European Association of Palliative care

Background: People with intellectual disabilities often present with unique challenges that make it more difficult to meet their
palliative care needs.
Aim: To define consensus norms for palliative care of people with intellectual disabilities in Europe.
Design: Delphi study in four rounds: (1) a taskforce of 12 experts from seven European countries drafted the norms, based on available empirical knowledge and regional/national guidelines; (2) using an online survey, 34 experts from 18 European countries evaluated the draft norms, provided feedback and distributed the survey within their professional networks. Criteria for consensus
were clearly defined; (3) modifications and recommendations were made by the taskforce; and (4) the European Association for
Palliative Care reviewed and approved the final version.
Setting and participants: Taskforce members: identified through international networking strategies. Expert panel: a purposive sample identified through taskforce members’ networks.
Results: A total of 80 experts from 15 European countries evaluated 52 items within the following 13 norms: equity of access, communication, recognising the need for palliative care, assessment of total needs, symptom management, end-of-life decision making, involving those who matter, collaboration, support for family/carers, preparing for death, bereavement support, education/training
and developing/managing services. None of the items scored less than 86% agreement, making a further round unnecessary. In light of respondents’ comments, several items were modified and one item was deleted.
Conclusion: This White Paper presents the first guidance for clinical practice, policy and research related to palliative care for people with intellectual disabilities based on evidence and European consensus, setting a benchmark for changes in policy and practice.

PIPc study: development of indicators of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care using a modified Delphi technique

Objective There is limited evidence regarding the quality of prescribing for children in primary care. Several prescribing criteria (indicators) have been developed to assess the appropriateness of prescribing in older and middle-aged adults but few are relevant to children. The objective of this study was to develop a set of prescribing indicators that can be applied to prescribing or dispensing data sets to determine the prevalence of potentially inappropriate prescribing in children (PIPc) in primary care settings.


Design Two-round modified Delphi consensus method.


Setting Irish and UK general practice.


Participants A project steering group consisting of academic and clinical general practitioners (GPs) and pharmacists was formed to develop a list of indicators from literature review and clinical expertise. 15 experts consisting of GPs, pharmacists and paediatricians from the Republic of Ireland and the UK formed the Delphi panel.


Results 47 indicators were reviewed by the project steering group and 16 were presented to the Delphi panel. In the first round of this exercise, consensus was achieved on nine of these indicators. Of the remaining seven indicators, two were removed following review of expert panel comments and discussion of the project steering group. The second round of the Delphi process focused on the remaining five indicators, which were amended based on first round feedback. Three indicators were accepted following the second round of the Delphi process and the remaining two indicators were removed. The final list consisted of 12 indicators categorised by respiratory system (n=6), gastrointestinal system (n=2), neurological system (n=2) and dermatological system (n=2).


Conclusions The PIPc indicators are a set of prescribing criteria developed for use in children in primary care in the absence of clinical information. The utility of these criteria will be tested in further studies using prescribing databases.

Inquiring into Non-Accidental Child Deaths: Reviewing the Review Process

There is significant public and professional interest in the non-accidental death of children where abuse and neglect are suspected of being contributory factors. Systems for reviewing these deaths have been developed in each of the four jurisdictions within the UK. The main aims are to ensure that individuals and professionals are held to account if practice falls below the expected standard, whilst also seeking to strengthen the systems for protecting children through reflecting on what lessons, if any, can be learnt from the death of a child through abuse or neglect. Recently, the benefit of such inquiries and the quality of serious case reviews have come under scrutiny. In this paper, the authors report the findings of a Delphi study that sought to explore how the process of conducting reviews following the death of a child could be improved through seeking the views of experienced professionals responsible for child protection in Northern Ireland. The authors conclude that the system does command professional support, but could be improved through greater attention to process issues and a stronger emphasis on translating learning into action. In common with research looking at other recent practice developments, there is a need to focus on process indicators as a means to ensuring that well intentioned policies are translated into workable and functioning practices.

Philadelphia-Negative Classical Myeloproliferative Neoplasms: Critical Concepts and Management Recommendations From European LeukemiaNet

We present a review of critical concepts and produce recommendations on the management of Philadelphia-negative classical myeloproliferative neoplasms, including monitoring, response definition, first-and second-line therapy, and therapy for special issues. Key questions were selected according the criterion of clinical relevance. Statements were produced using a Delphi process, and two consensus conferences involving a panel of 21 experts appointed by the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) were convened. Patients with polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) should be defined as high risk if age is greater than 60 years or there is a history of previous thrombosis. Risk stratification in primary myelofibrosis (PMF) should start with the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) for newly diagnosed patients and dynamic IPSS for patients being seen during their disease course, with the addition of cytogenetics evaluation and transfusion status. High-risk patients with PV should be managed with phlebotomy, low-dose aspirin, and cytoreduction, with either hydroxyurea or interferon at any age. High-risk patients with ET should be managed with cytoreduction, using hydroxyurea at any age. Monitoring response in PV and ET should use the ELN clinicohematologic criteria. Corticosteroids, androgens, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, and immunomodulators are recommended to treat anemia of PMF, whereas hydroxyurea is the first-line treatment of PMF-associated splenomegaly. Indications for splenectomy include symptomatic portal hypertension, drug-refractory painful splenomegaly, and frequent RBC transfusions. The risk of allogeneic stem-cell transplantation-related complications is justified in transplantation-eligible patients whose median survival time is expected to be less than 5 years.

Establishing a minimum dataset for prospective registration of systematic reviews: an international consultation

Background: In response to growing recognition of the value of prospective registration of systematic review protocols, we planned to develop a web-based open access international register. In order for the register to fulfil its aims of reducing unplanned duplication, reducing publication bias, and providing greater transparency, it was important to ensure the appropriate data were collected. We therefore undertook a consultation process with experts in the field to identify a minimum dataset for registration. Methods and Findings: A two-round electronic modified Delphi survey design was used. The international panel surveyed included experts from areas relevant to systematic review including commissioners, clinical and academic researchers, methodologists, statisticians, information specialists, journal editors and users of systematic reviews. Direct invitations to participate were sent out to 315 people in the first round and 322 in the second round. Responses to an open invitation to participate were collected separately. There were 194 (143 invited and 51 open) respondents with a 100% completion rate in the first round and 209 (169 invited and 40 open) respondents with a 91% completion rate in the second round. In the second round, 113 (54%) of the participants reported having previously taken part in the first round. Participants were asked to indicate whether a series of potential items should be designated as optional or required registration items, or should not be included in the register. After the second round, a 70% or greater agreement was reached on the designation of 30 of 36 items. Conclusions: The results of the Delphi exercise have established a dataset of 22 required items for the prospective registration of systematic reviews, and 18 optional items. The dataset captures the key attributes of review design as well as the administrative details necessary for registration.

Cystic fibrosis research in allied health and nursing professions

This report is the result of the "Allied Health and Nursing Professions Working Group" meeting which took place in Verona, Italy, November 2009, which was organised by the European Cystic Fibrosis Society, and involved 32 experts. The meeting was designed to provide a "roadmap" of high priority research questions that can be addressed by Allied Health Professionals (AHP) and nursing. The other goal was to identify research skills that would be beneficial to AHP and nursing researchers and would ultimately improve the research capacity and capability of these professions. The following tasks were accomplished: 1) a Delphi survey was used to identify high priority research areas and themes, 2) common research designs used in AHP and nursing research were evaluated in terms of their strengths and weaknesses, 3) methods for assessing the clinimetric and psychometric properties, as well as feasibility, of relevant outcome measures were reviewed, and 4) a common skill set for AHPs and nurses undertaking clinical research was agreed on and will guide the planning of future research opportunities. This report has identified important areas and themes for future research which include: adherence; physical activity/exercise; nutritional interventions; interventions for the newborn with CF and evaluation of outcome measures for use in AHP and nursing research. It has highlighted the significant challenges AHPs and nurses experience in conducting clinical research, and proposes strategies to overcome these challenges. It is hoped that this report will encourage research initiatives that assess the efficacy/effectiveness of AHP and nursing interventions in order to improve the evidence base. This should increase the quality of research conducted by these professions, justify services they currently provide, and expand their skills in new areas, with the ultimate goal of improving care for patients with CF.

International Association for Hospice and Palliative Care (IAHPC) List of Essential Practices in Palliative Care

The objective of this study was to identify, through a consensus process, the essential practices in primary palliative care. A three-phase study was designed. Phase 1 methods included development of a working group; a literature review; development of a baseline list of practices; and identification of levels of intervention. In Phase 2, physicians, nurses, and nurse aides (n = 425) from 63 countries were asked in three Delphi rounds to rate the baseline practices as essential or nonessential and select the appropriate levels of intervention for each. In Phase 3, representatives of 45 palliative care organizations were asked to select and rank the 10 most important practices resulting from Phase 2. Scores (1-10) were assigned to each, based on the selected level of importance. Results of Phase 1 were a baseline list of 140 practices. Three levels of intervention were identified: Identification/Evaluation; Diagnosis; and Treatment/Solution measures. In Phase 2, the response rates (RR) for the Delphi rounds were 96.5%, 73.6%, and 71.8%, respectively. A consensus point (=80% agreement) was applied, resulting in 62 practices. In Phase 3, RR was 100%. Forty-nine practices were selected and ranked. "Evaluation, Diagnosis and Treatment of Pain" scored the highest (352 points). The working group (WG) arranged the resulting practices in four categories: Physical care needs, Psychological/Emotional/Spiritual care needs, Care Planning and Coordination, and Communication. The IAHPC List of Essential Practices in Palliative care may help define appropriate primary palliative care and improve the quality of care delivered globally. Further studies are needed to evaluate their uptake and impact.