Defining Optimal Post-prison Care for Those With Psychosis: A Delphi Study
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Simpson P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8569300 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionRetrospective 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.MethodA 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.ResultsOf 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.ConclusionBased 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".
| S-EPMC8108467 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Pharmacists are uniquely placed in the community to be of assistance to disaster-affected patients. However, the roles undertaken by pharmacists in disasters are identified based on their own experiences and networks. There is currently no definition or acknowledgment of pharmacists' roles in disasters. OBJECTIVE:To acquire consensus from an expert panel of key opinion leaders within the field of disaster health on pharmacists' roles in disasters throughout the four disaster phases-prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. METHODS:A Delphi study consisting of three rounds of online surveys was utilised. Twenty-four key opinion leaders were contacted, with 15 completing all three rounds. The 15 expert panellists were presented with 46 roles identified in the literature and asked to rank their opinions on a 5-point Likert scale. This study used an international, all-hazard, and multijurisdictional approach. Consensus was benchmarked at 80% and any role which did not reach consensus was re-queried in the subsequent round. The third round provided the results of the Delphi study and sought commentary on the acceptance or rejection of the roles. RESULTS:Of the 46 roles provided to the expert panel, 43 roles were accepted as roles pharmacists are capable of undertaking in a disaster. There were five roles for the prevention phase, nine for the preparedness phase, 21 for the response phase, and eight for the recovery phase. The experts were asked to prioritise the top five roles for each of the disaster phases. The three roles which did not make consensus were deemed to be specialised roles for disaster pharmacists and not generalisable to the broader pharmacy profession. CONCLUSION:This study identifies pharmacists' roles in disasters which have been accepted by the international disaster health community. The international key opinion leaders recommended that pharmacists could be undertaking 43 roles in a disaster, however, this is dependent on individual jurisdiction considerations. Pharmacy professional associations need to advocate to policymakers for legislative support and to ensure pharmacists are equipped with the training and education required to undertake these roles within specific jurisdictions.
| S-EPMC6932796 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesAlthough community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is one of the most common infections in children, no standardized risk classification exists to guide management. The objective of this study was to develop expert consensus for factors associated with various degrees of disease severity in pediatric CAP.MethodsUsing a web-based classical Delphi process, a multidisciplinary panel of 10 childhood pneumonia experts rated the degree of severity (mild, moderate, or severe) of clinical, radiographic, and laboratory factors, as well as outcomes relevant to pediatric pneumonia. Round 1 was open-ended, with panelists freely stating all characteristics they felt determined pneumonia severity. In rounds 2 to 4, panelists used a 9-point Likert scale (1-3, mild; 4-6, moderate; 7-9, severe) to rate severity for each item. Consensus was defined as 70% or greater agreement in ranking mild, moderate, or severe.ResultsPanelists identified 318 factors or outcomes in round 1; the panel reached consensus for 286 (90%). The majority of items without consensus straddled levels of severity (eg, mild-moderate). Notable clinical factors with consensus included age, oxygen saturation, age-based respiratory rate, and gestational age. Severity classification consensus was also reached for specific imaging and laboratory findings. Need for and duration of hospitalization, supplemental oxygen/respiratory support, and intravenous fluids/medications were considered important outcomes in classifying severity.ConclusionsThis study presents factors deemed important for risk stratification in pediatric CAP by consensus of a multidisciplinary expert panel. This initial step toward identifying and formalizing severity criteria for CAP informs critical knowledge gaps and can be leveraged in future development of clinically meaningful risk stratification scores.
| S-EPMC8223262 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Substantial declines in genital warts (GW) have been observed in countries with quadrivalent HPV vaccination programmes, with Australia showing the highest reductions due to early commencement and high vaccination coverage. There is a real potential to achieve GW elimination; however, no GW elimination definition exists. Taking Australia as a case study, we aimed to reach expert consensus on a proposed GW elimination definition using a modified Delphi process. Method: We used modelling and epidemiological data to estimate the expected number of new GW cases, from pre-vaccination (baseline) in 2006 to the year 2060 in Australian heterosexuals, men who have sex with men (MSM), and newly arrived international travellers and migrants. We used these data and the literature, to develop a questionnaire containing ten elimination-related items, each with 9-point Likert scales (1-strongly disagree; 9-strongly agree). The survey was completed by 18 experts who participated in a full day face-to-face modified Delphi study, in which individuals and then small groups discussed and scored each item. The process was repeated online for items where consensus (≥70% agreement) was not initially achieved. Median and coefficient of variation (COV) were used to describe the central tendency and variability of responses, respectively. Findings: There was a 95% participation rate in the face-to-face session, and 84% response rate in the final online round. The median item score ranged between 7.0 and 9.0 and the COV was ≤0.30 on all items. Consensus was reached that at ≥80% HPV vaccination coverage, GW will be eliminated as a public health problem in Australia by 2060. During this time period there will be a 95% reduction in population-level incidence compared with baseline, equivalent to <1 GW case per 10,000 population. The reductions will occur most rapidly in Australian heterosexuals, with 73%, 90% and 97% relative reductions by years 2021, 2030 and 2060, respectively. The proportion of new GW cases attributable to importation will increase from 3.6% in 2006 to ~49% in 2060. Interpretation: Our results indicate that the vaccination programme will minimise new GW cases in the Australian population, but importation of cases will continue. This is the first study to define GW elimination at a national level. The framework developed could be used to define GW elimination in other countries, with thresholds particularly valuable for vaccination programme impact evaluation. Funding: LK supported through an Australian Government Research Training Programme Scholarship; unconditional funding from Seqirus to support the Delphi Workshop.
| S-EPMC7350253 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to establish consensus about the meaning of recovery among individuals with experience of psychosis. A Delphi approach was utilized to allow a large sample of service users to be anonymously consulted about their views on recovery. Service users were invited to take part in a 3-stage consultation process. A total of 381 participants gave their views on recovery in the main stage of this study, with 100 of these taking part in the final review stage. The final list of statements about recovery included 94 items, which were rated as essential or important by >80% of respondents. These statements covered items which define recovery, factors which help recovery, factors which hinder recovery, and factors which show that someone is recovering. As far as we are aware, it is the first study to identify areas of consensus in relation to definitions of recovery from a service user perspective, which are typically reported to be an idiosyncratic process. Implications and recommendations for clinical practice and future research are discussed.
| S-EPMC4193718 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This research sought to answer the question 'what quality criteria do survivorship experts consider to be important in achieving optimal cancer survivorship care?'. An online modified reactive Delphi survey consisting of two rounds was completed with experts including consumers, clinicians, researchers, policymakers and quality and accreditation professionals. Survey items were based on international literature and considered three domains: Policy, process and outcome. In round 1 (R1), experts ranked the importance of 68 criteria on a five-point Likert scale. Criteria were retained if scored 4 (important) or 5 (very important) by >75% participants. In round 2 (R2), experts ranked top 10 criteria per domain. Response rates were 79% (70/89) and 84% (76/91), respectively. After R1, six criteria were removed and six were added. From R2, ten items for each domain were retained. These 30 items formed the Quality Framework. A consensus meeting considered priority items from the Quality Framework and feasibility of data collection. Prioritized items included having a policy on survivorship care; the existence of a multidisciplinary survivorship program (policy); appropriate processes to assess survivors' emotional, psychological and physical needs following treatment and stratification to appropriate models of care (process); and collecting patient-reported outcomes, quality of life and survival rates (outcome).
| S-EPMC8150859 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo gain consensus on the items that determine adequacy of shift staffing.DesignThis was a three-round Delphi study to establish consensus on what defines adequacy of shift staffing in a general hospital ward. A literature review, focus group and five semistructured expert interviews were used to generate items for the Delphi study.SettingMulticentre study in The Netherlands.ParticipantsNurses, head nurses, nursing managers, and capacity consultants and managers working for Dutch hospitals.ResultsTwenty-six items were included in the Delphi study. One hundred and sixty-eight, 123 and 93 participants were included in the first, second and third round, respectively. After three rounds, six items were included (mostly related to direct patient care) and nine items were excluded. No consensus was reached on 12 items, including one item that was added after the first round.ConclusionsThis is the first study to specify items that determine adequacy of staffing. These items can be used to measure adequacy of staffing, which is crucial for enhancing nurse staffing methods. Further research is needed to refine the items of staffing adequacy and to further develop and psychometrically test an instrument for measuring staffing adequacy.
| S-EPMC9351332 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveInsomnia is highly prevalent in prisoners and is a risk factor for poor mental well-being, depression, suicidality and aggression, all common concerns in this vulnerable population. Improving sleep management options in prison offers the potential to impact positively on a number of these common risk factors. The study aim was to design a treatment pathway for insomnia in prisons informed by stakeholders with professional or lived experience of insomnia and prison-based interventions.DesignA modified Delphi technique, adapted to the stakeholder (either receiving controlled feedback online or face to face on a series of statements), was used over three rounds to gain consensus on a final treatment pathway design.ParticipantsAcademic sleep researchers, prison staff and prisoners were invited to develop the treatment pathway.ResultsFifteen stakeholders took part in round 1 and thirteen in round 2. There were six statements of contention that comprised concerns over the inclusion of sleep observations, sleep restriction therapy and promethazine. Consensus was high (>80%). Thirteen stakeholders agreed the final pathway in round 3. The final treatment pathway comprised a standardised stepped-care approach for insomnia in prison populations. The pathway resulted in five main stages: (1) transition from community; (2) detection and assessment; (3) treatment for short-term insomnia; (4) treatment for long-term insomnia and (5) transition from prison to community or another establishment.ConclusionsThe treatment pathway is designed to promote early detection of insomnia, potentially reducing unnecessary prescriptions and medication trading, misuse and diversion in the prison setting. It should make a substantial difference in reducing the large number of sleep complaints and positively impact on prisoners, staff and the prison environment. Specifically, improving sleep should have a positive impact on prisoners' mental and physical well-being and aid smooth running of the prison.
| S-EPMC6119453 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Guidelines for how a member of the public should give first aid to a person who is becoming psychotic have been developed for English-speaking countries. However, these guidelines may not be appropriate for use in other cultures. A study was therefore carried out to examine whether it was possible to achieve consensus on guidelines that could apply in a range of Asian countries. METHODS: A Delphi consensus study was carried out with a panel of 28 Asian mental health clinicians drawn from Cambodia, China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mongolia, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam. The panel was given a 211 item questionnaire about possible first aid actions and asked to rate whether they thought these should be included in guidelines. Panel members were invited to propose additional items. RESULTS: After three Delphi rounds, there were 128 items that were rated as "essential" or "important" by 80% or more of the panel members. These items covered: recognition of psychosis, encouraging and assisting the person to seek help, how to interact with the person, responding to acute psychosis, responding to aggression, and what to do if the person refuses to get professional help. CONCLUSION: Despite the diversity of the countries involved, there was consensus on a core set of first aid items that were considered as suitable for assisting a psychotic person. Future work is needed to develop guidelines for specific countries.
| S-EPMC2278127 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe work environment of healthcare professionals is important for good patient care and is receiving increasing attention in scientific research. A clear and unambiguous understanding of a positive work environment, as perceived by healthcare professionals, is crucial for gaining systematic objective insights into the work environment. The aim of this study was to gain consensus on the concept of a positive work environment in the hospital.MethodsThis was a three-round Delphi study to establish consensus on what defines a positive work environment. A literature review and 17 semi-structured interviews with experts (transcribed and analyzed by open and thematic coding) were used to generate items for the Delphi study.ResultsThe literature review revealed 228 aspects that were clustered into 48 work environment elements, 38 of which were mentioned in the interviews also. After three Delphi rounds, 36 elements were regarded as belonging to a positive work environment in the hospital.DiscussionThe work environment is a broad concept with several perspectives. Although all 36 elements are considered important for a positive work environment, they have different perspectives. Mapping the included elements revealed that no one work environment measurement tool includes all the elements.ConclusionWe identified 36 elements that are important for a positive work environment. This knowledge can be used to select the right measurement tool or to develop interventions for improving the work environment. However, the different perspectives of the work environment should be considered.
| S-EPMC7906333 | biostudies-literature