Dataset Information

Standardised method for reporting exercise programmes: protocol for a modified Delphi study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Exercise is integral to health across the lifespan and important for people with chronic health conditions. A systematic review of exercise trials for chronic conditions reported suboptimal descriptions of the evaluated interventions and concluded that this hinders interpretation and replication. The aim of this project is to develop a standardised method for reporting essential exercise programme details being evaluated in clinical trials.

Methods and analysis

A modified Delphi technique will be used to gain consensus among international exercise experts. We will use three sequential rounds of anonymous online questionnaires to refine a standardised checklist. A draft checklist of potentially relevant items was developed based on the results of a systematic review of exercise systematic reviews. An international panel of experts was identified by exercise systematic review authorship, established international profile in exercise research and practice and by peer referral. In round 1, the international panel of experts will be asked to rate the importance of each draft item and provide additional suggestions for revisions or new items. Consensus will be considered reached if at least 70% of the panel strongly agree/disagree that an item should be included or excluded. Where agreement is not reached or there are suggestions for altered or new items, these will be taken to round 2 together with an aggregated summary of round 1 responses. Following the second round, a ranking of item importance will be made to rationalise the number of items. The final template will be distributed to panel members for approval.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethics approval was received from The Cabrini Institute Ethics Committee, Melbourne, Australia (HREC 02-07-04-14). We plan to use a stepwise process to develop and refine a standardised and internationally agreed template for explicit reporting of exercise programmes. The template will be generalisable across all types of exercise interventions. The findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

SUBMITTER: Slade SC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4281530 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Standardised method for reporting exercise programmes: protocol for a modified Delphi study.

Slade Susan C SC Dionne Clermont E CE Underwood Martin M Buchbinder Rachelle R

BMJ open 20141230 12

<h4>Introduction</h4>Exercise is integral to health across the lifespan and important for people with chronic health conditions. A systematic review of exercise trials for chronic conditions reported suboptimal descriptions of the evaluated interventions and concluded that this hinders interpretation and replication. The aim of this project is to develop a standardised method for reporting essential exercise programme details being evaluated in clinical trials.<h4>Methods and analysis</h4>A modi ...[more]

PMID: 25550297

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionExercise is vital to health and well-being after a cancer diagnosis yet is poorly integrated in cancer care. Knowledge mobilization (KM) is essential to enhance exercise opportunities. We aimed to (1) develop and refine a list of highly important exercise oncology research and KM themes and (2) establish the relative importance of the themes for supporting the implementation of exercise as a standard of care for people living with and beyond cancer.MethodsInformed by the Co-Produced Pathway to Impact KM framework, a modified Delphi study approach was used to develop, rate, and rank exercise oncology research and KM themes through an international stakeholder workshop and a three-round iterative online survey. Open-ended stakeholder feedback from cancer survivors, healthcare practitioners (HCPs), qualified exercise professionals (QEPs), policy makers, and researchers was used to update themes between survey rounds. Themes were ranked from highest to lowest importance and agreement was examined across all stakeholders and within stakeholder groups.ResultsA total of 269 exercise oncology stakeholders from 13 countries participated in the study. Twelve final exercise oncology research and KM themes were produced. The final top ranked research themes were related to: (1) QEP integration into primary cancer care teams, (2) Exercise oncology education for HCPs, and (3) Accessibility of cancer exercise programs & support services. There was statistically significant agreement between stakeholders (p<0.001) and within stakeholder groups (p's≤0.02) on the general rankings of themes (i.e., some themes generally ranked higher and lower compared to others). Low Kendall's W statistics indicated variability related to the specific ranked order of the themes between stakeholders and within stakeholder groups. Moreover, there were key differences in the rankings for specific themes between policy makers and other stakeholder groups that highlight potentially important discordance in the research and KM priorities for policy makers that warrants further study.ConclusionThese findings can be used to guide initiatives and align stakeholders on priorities to support exercise implementation as a standard of cancer care. Additional research is needed to better understand the differences in the proposed research and KM priorities across stakeholders.

Project description:ObjectiveGuidelines for a structured assessment in community paramedicine home visit programmes have not been established and evidence to inform their creation is lacking. We sought to investigate the relevance of assessment items to the practice of community paramedics according to a pre-established clarity-utility matrix.DesignWe designed a modified-Delphi study consisting of predetermined thresholds for achieving consensus, number of rounds of for scoring items, a defined meeting and discussion process, and a sample of participants that was purposefully representative.Setting and participantsWe established a panel of 26 community paramedics representing 20 municipal paramedic services in Ontario, Canada. The sample represented a majority of paramedic services within the province that were operating a community paramedicine home visit programme.MeasuresDrawing from a bank of standardised assessment items grouped according to domains aligned with the International Classification on Functioning, Disability, and Health taxonomy, 64 previously pilot-tested assessment items were scored according to their clarity (being free from ambiguity and easy to understand) and utility (being valued in care planning or case management activities). Assessment items covered a broad range of health, social and environmental domains. To conclude scoring rounds, assessment items that did not achieve consensus for relevance to assessment practices were discussed among participants with opportunities to modify assessment items for subsequent rounds of scoring.ResultsResulting from the first round of scoring, 54 assessment items were identified as being relevant to assessment practices and 3 assessment items were removed from subsequent rounds. The remaining 7 assessment items were modified, with some parts removed from the final items that achieved consensus in the final rounds of scoring.ConclusionA broadly representative panel of community paramedics identified consensus for 61 assessment items that could be included in a structured, multidomain, assessment instrument for guiding practice in community paramedicine home visit programmes.Trail registration numberISRCTN58273216.

Project description:ObjectiveCommunity paramedicine programme are often designed to address repeated and non-urgent use of paramedic services by providing patients with alternatives to the traditional 'treat and transport' ambulance model of care. We sought to investigate the level of consensus that could be found by a panel of experts regarding appropriate health, social and environmental domains that should be assessed in community paramedicine home visit programme.DesignWe applied the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method in a modified Delphi method to investigate the level of consensus on assessment domains for use in community paramedicine home visit programme.Setting and participantsWe included a multi-national panel of 17 experts on community paramedicine and in-home assessment from multiple settings (paramedicine, primary care, mental health, home and community care, geriatric care).MeasuresA list of potential assessment categories was established after a targeted literature review and confirmed by panel members. Over multiple rounds, panel members scored the appropriateness of 48 assessment domains on a Likert scale from 0 (not appropriate) to 5 (very appropriate). Scores were then reviewed at an in-person meeting and a finalised list of assessment domains was generated.ResultsAfter the preliminary round of scoring, all 48 assessment domains had scores that demonstrated consensus. Nine assessment domains (18.8%) demonstrated a wider range of rated appropriateness. No domains were found to be not appropriate. Achieving consensus about the appropriateness of assessment domains on the first round of scoring negated the need for subsequent rounds of scoring. The in-person meeting resulted in re-grouping assessment domains and adding an additional domain about urinary continence.ConclusionAn international panel of experts with knowledge about in-home assessment by community paramedics demonstrated a high level of agreement on appropriate patient assessment domains for community paramedicine home visit programme. Community paramedicine home visit programme are likely to have similar patient populations. A standardised assessment instrument may be viable in multiple settings.

Project description:More than 10 % (approximately 60,000) of the adult population in Styria, a federal state in the south of Austria, is granted a residential stay in a health resort each year. The target group for these stays is the general population aged between 30 and 65 years with minor symptoms such as risk factors for cardio-metabolic diseases. Stays are financed by health insurance companies and last up to three weeks. The treatment during the stays consists of exercise and nutritional intervention as well as psychological support when needed. However, because of the absence of regional programmes linked with the residential stay, the sustainability of the interventions is questionable.This prospective, controlled, multicentre, open-label study will compare two groups. Participants will be included in the study if they live in any of eight predefined Styrian regions and do not meet the minimal WHO physical activity guidelines. Those allocated to the intervention group will receive a voucher for 12 regional, standardised, sports club based exercise sessions. The members of the control group will come from different but matched Styrian regions and will receive an informative written brochure. The primary outcome will be the weekly level of health-enhancing physical activity, which will be objectively measured with an accelerometer and supplemented by an activity log book. Together with potential determinants of physical activity it will be assessed before, 10 weeks after and 12 months after the residential stay. Additionally, psychosocial determinants will be assessed by questionnaire and fitness (cardiorespiratory fitness, handgrip, balance) will be measured. In addition to the changes in measurable parameters, processes will be evaluated to learn about the facilitators and barriers of the implementation of the programme.It is known that during the residential stay, participants are receptive to new opportunities supporting health behaviour change, but that these measures are not sustained after discharge. The structured cooperation between the health sector that has to inform the participants and the sports sector that provides the wide network of standardised programmes is the strength of the study, but at the same time a challenge.ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02552134 ; date of registration: 15 September 2015).

Project description:IntroductionRigorous evaluation of innovative invasive procedures and medical devices is uncommon and lacks reporting standardisation. Devices may therefore enter routine practice without thorough evaluation, resulting in patient harm. Detailed guidance on how to select and report outcomes at each stage of evaluation is lacking. Development of reporting guidance and core outcome sets (COS) is one strategy to promote safe and transparent evaluation.Methods and analysisA COS, comprising outcome domains applicable to all phases of evaluation of procedure/device introduction and modification and, if necessary, supplementary domains relevant to specific phases or types of innovation (procedure or device), will be developed according to principles outlined by Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) and Core Outcome Set-Standards for Development (COS-STAD) guidelines. Reporting guidance will be developed concurrently. The study will have the following three phases:1. Generation of a list of relevant outcome domains and reporting items identified from (a) published studies, (b) hospital policy documentation, (c) regulatory body documentation and (d) stakeholder qualitative interviews. Identified items/domains will be categorised using a conceptual framework and formatted into Delphi consensus survey questionnaire items.2. Key stakeholders, including 50 patients and 150 professionals (surgeons, researchers, device manufacturers, regulatory representatives, journal editors) sampled from multinational sources, will complete a Delphi survey to score the importance of each reporting item and outcome.3. A consensus meeting with key stakeholders will discuss and agree the final content of the reporting guidance and COS(s).Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been granted by North East-Newcastle and North Tyneside 1 Health Research Authority Research Ethics Committee (18/NE/0378). Dissemination strategies include scientific meeting presentations, peer-reviewed journal publications, development of plain English summaries/materials, patient engagement events, development of a social media identity, workshops and other events.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Few interventions have been designed that provide standardised information to primary care clinicians about the diagnostic and treatment recommendations resulting from cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) (tumour board) meetings. This study aimed to develop, implement and evaluate a standardised template for lung cancer MDTs to provide clinical information and treatment recommendations to general practitioners (GPs). Specific objectives were to (1) evaluate template feasibility (acceptability, appropriateness and timeliness) with GPs and (2) document processes of preimplementation, implementation and evaluation within the MDT setting. DESIGN:A mixed-method study design using structured interviews with GPs and qualitative documentation of project logs about implementation processes. SETTING:Two hospitals in Central Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. PARTICIPANTS:61 GPs evaluated the template. Two lung cancer MDTs, consisting of 33 clinicians, and eight researchers participated in template development and implementation strategy. RESULTS:The MDT-reporting template appears to be a feasible way of providing clinical information to GPs following patient presentation at a lung cancer MDT meeting. Ninety-five per cent of GPs strongly agreed or agreed that the standardised template provided useful and relevant information, that it was received in a timely manner (90%) and that the information was easy to interpret and communicate to the patient (84%). Implementation process data show that the investment made in the preimplementation stage to integrate the template into standard work practices was a critical factor in successful implementation. CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates that it is feasible to provide lung cancer MDT treatment recommendations to GPs through implementation of a standardised template. A simple intervention, such as a standardised template, can help to address quality gaps and ensure that timely information is communicated between tertiary and primary care healthcare providers.

Dataset Information

Standardised method for reporting exercise programmes: protocol for a modified Delphi study.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Publications

Standardised method for reporting exercise programmes: protocol for a modified Delphi study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure