A Core Outcome Set for Research Evaluating Interventions to Enable Communication in Patients With an Artificial Airway: An International Delphi Consensus Study (Comm-COS)

被引:5
作者
Freeman-Sanderson, Amy [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
Brodsky, Martin B. [5 ]
Dale, Craig [6 ]
Gupta, Anushua
Haines, Kimberley [7 ]
Happ, Mary Beth [8 ]
Hart, Nicholas [9 ]
Hemsley, Bronwyn [1 ]
Istanboulian, Laura [10 ,11 ]
Spronk, Peter [12 ]
Sullivan, Rebecca [1 ]
Sutt, Anna-Liisa [13 ]
Rose, Louise [14 ]
机构
[1] Univ Technol Sydney, Fac Hlth, Grad Sch Hlth, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Royal Prince Alfred Hosp, Dept Speech Pathol, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[3] UNSW Sydney, George Inst Global Hlth, Fac Med, Crit Care Div, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[4] Monash Univ, Australian & New Zealand Intens Care Res Ctr ANZIC, Sch Publ Hlth & Prevent Med, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[5] Cleveland Clin, Head & Neck Inst, Cleveland, OH USA
[6] Univ Toronto, Lawrence S Bloomberg Fac Nursing, Toronto, ON, Canada
[7] Univ Melbourne, Melbourne Med Sch, Dept Physiotherapy, Dept Crit Care,Western Hlth, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[8] Ohio State Univ, Coll Nursing, Columbus, OH USA
[9] Guys & St Thomas NHS Fdn Trust, London, England
[10] Toronto Metropolitan Univ, Daphne Cockwell Sch Nursing, Toronto, ON, Canada
[11] Toronto East Hlth Network, Michael Garron Hosp, Toronto, ON, Canada
[12] Gelre Hosp, Dept Intens Care, Apeldoorn, Netherlands
[13] Prince Charles Hosp, Crit Care Res Grp, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[14] Kings Coll London, Florence Nightingale Fac Nursing Midwifery & Palli, London, England
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
airway management; clinical trials; communication; core outcome set; critical care; INTENSIVE-CARE; ALTERNATIVE COMMUNICATION; INVOLVEMENT; VALIDATION; DECISIONS; ADULTS; VOICE;
D O I
10.1097/CCM.0000000000006347
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVES:Critically ill adults requiring artificial airways experience profound communication deficits. Studies of interventions supporting communication report disparate outcomes, creating subsequent challenges in the interpretation of their effectiveness. Therefore, we aimed to develop international consensus for a communication core outcome set (Comm-COS) for future trials of communication interventions in this population.DESIGN:1) Systematic review, 2) patient/family interviews, 3) two-round modified Delphi, and 4) virtual consensus meetings with a final voting round. A multidisciplinary expert steering committee oversaw all stages.SETTING:Interviews and consensus meetings were conducted via videoconferencing. Digital methods were used for Delphi and final Comm-COS voting.SUBJECTS:Three stakeholder groups: 1) patient and family members with lived experience within 3 years, 2) clinicians with experience working in critical care, and 3) researchers publishing in the field.INTERVENTION:None.MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:We identified 59 outcomes via our systematic review, 3 unique outcomes from qualitative interviews, and 2 outcomes from our steering committee. Following item reduction, 32 outcomes were presented in Delphi round 1; 134 participants voted; 15 patient/family (11%), 91 clinicians (68%), and 28 researchers (21%). Nine additional outcomes were generated and added to round 2; 106 (81%) participants voted. Following completion of the consensus processes, the Comm-COS includes seven outcomes: 1) changes in emotions and wellbeing associated with ability to communicate, 2) physical impact of communication aid use, 3) time to functional communication, 4) ability to communicate healthcare needs (comfort/care/safety/decisions), 5) conversation agency, 6) ability to establish a communication connection to develop and maintain relationships, and 7) acceptability of the communication intervention.CONCLUSIONS:This is the first COS to specifically focus on communication for critically ill adults. Limitations for operationalization include selection of measures to use with these outcomes. Identification of suitable measures and adoption of the Comm-COS in future trials will help establish effective interventions to ameliorate the highly prevalent and negative experience of communicative incapacity.
引用
收藏
页码:e450 / e462
页数:13
相关论文
共 47 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2017, National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards, VSecond
[2]   Three nested randomized controlled trials of peer-only or multiple stakeholder group feedback within Delphi surveys during core outcome and information set development [J].
Brookes, Sara T. ;
Macefield, Rhiannon C. ;
Williamson, Paula R. ;
McNair, Angus G. ;
Potter, Shelley ;
Blencowe, Natalie S. ;
Strong, Sean ;
Blazeby, Jane M. .
TRIALS, 2016, 17
[3]   The development and validation of the Visual Analogue Self-Esteem Scale (VASES) [J].
Brumfitt, SM ;
Sheeran, P .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1999, 38 :387-400
[4]   Which alternative communication methods are effective for voiceless patients in Intensive Care Units? A systematic review [J].
Carruthers, Helen ;
Astin, Felicity ;
Munro, Wendy .
INTENSIVE AND CRITICAL CARE NURSING, 2017, 42 :88-96
[5]   Prevalence of swallow, communication, voice and cognitive compromise following hospitalisation for COVID-19: the PHOSP-COVID analysis [J].
Dawson, Camilla ;
Clunie, Gemma ;
Evison, Felicity ;
Duncan, Sallyanne ;
Whitney, Julie ;
Houchen-Wolloff, Linzy ;
Bolton, Charlotte E. ;
Leavy, Olivia C. ;
Richardson, Matthew ;
Omer, Elneima ;
McAuley, Hamish ;
Shikotra, Aarti ;
Singapuri, Amisha ;
Sereno, Marco ;
Saunders, Ruth M. ;
Harris, Victoria C. ;
Greening, Neil J. ;
Nolan, Claire Marie ;
Wootton, Dan Gower ;
Daynes, Enya ;
Donaldson, Gavin ;
Sargent, Jack ;
Scott, Janet ;
Pimm, John ;
Bishop, Lettie ;
McNarry, Melitta ;
Hart, Nicholas ;
Evans, Rachael A. ;
Singh, Sally ;
Yates, Tom ;
Chalder, Trudie ;
Man, William ;
Harrison, Ewen ;
Docherty, Annemarie ;
Lone, Nazir, I ;
Quint, Jennifer K. ;
Chalmers, James ;
Ho, Ling-Pei ;
Horsley, Alex Robert ;
Marks, Michael ;
Poinasamy, Krisnah ;
Raman, Betty ;
Wain, Louise, V ;
Brightling, Chris ;
PHOSP-COVID Collaborative Grp, Neil ;
Sharma, Neil ;
Coffey, Margaret ;
Kulkarni, Amit ;
Wallace, Sarah .
BMJ OPEN RESPIRATORY RESEARCH, 2023, 10 (01)
[6]   Core outcomes sets for studies evaluating critical illness and patient recovery [J].
Dinglas, Victor D. ;
Cherukuri, Sai P. S. ;
Needham, Dale M. .
CURRENT OPINION IN CRITICAL CARE, 2020, 26 (05) :489-499
[7]   Understanding patient-important outcomes after critical illness: a synthesis of recent qualitative, empirical, and consensus-related studies [J].
Dinglas, Victor D. ;
Faraone, Leeza N. ;
Needham, Dale M. .
CURRENT OPINION IN CRITICAL CARE, 2018, 24 (05) :401-409
[8]   A taxonomy has been developed for outcomes in medical research to help improve knowledge discovery [J].
Dodd, Susanna ;
Clarke, Mike ;
Becker, Lorne ;
Mavergames, Chris ;
Fish, Rebecca ;
Williamson, Paula R. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2018, 96 :84-92
[9]   The qualitative content analysis process [J].
Elo, Satu ;
Kyngaes, Helvi .
JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 2008, 62 (01) :107-115
[10]   Quality of life improves for tracheostomy patients with return of voice: A mixed methods evaluation of the patient experience across the care continuum [J].
Freeman-Sanderson, Amy L. ;
Togher, Leanne ;
Elkins, Mark ;
Kenny, Belinda .
INTENSIVE AND CRITICAL CARE NURSING, 2018, 46 :10-16