Development of a minimum dataset for subacute rehabilitation: a three-round e-Delphi consensus study

被引:8
作者
Young, Adrienne M. [1 ,2 ]
Chung, Hannah [3 ]
Chaplain, Alicia [1 ]
Lowe, Joshua R. [3 ]
Wallace, Sarah J. [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Royal Brisbane & Womens Hosp, Allied Hlth Profess, Herston, Qld, Australia
[2] Univ Queensland, Ctr Hlth Serv Res, Herston, Qld, Australia
[3] Univ Queensland, Sch Hlth & Rehabil Sci, St Lucia, Qld, Australia
[4] Univ Queensland, Queensland Aphasia Res Ctr, Herston, Qld, Australia
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
rehabilitation medicine; quality in health care; health services administration & management; HEALTH; SERVICES;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058725
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives To develop a minimum dataset to be routinely collected across a heterogenous population within a subacute rehabilitation service to guide best care and outcomes for patients, and value for the health service. Design Three-round e-Delphi exercise, followed by consensus meetings. Setting Multicentre study in Brisbane, Australia. Participants Rehabilitation decision-makers, researchers and clinicians were invited to participate in the e-Delphi exercise. A multidisciplinary project steering committee (rehabilitation decision makers, researchers, clinicians and consumers) participated in consensus meetings. Methods In round 1 of the e-Delphi, participants responded to an open-ended question, generating data and outcomes that should be routinely collected in rehabilitation. In rounds 2 and 3, participants rated the importance of collecting each item on a nine-point scale. Consensus was defined a priori, as items rated as 'essential' by at least 70%, and of 'limited importance' by less than 15%, of respondents. Consensus meetings were held to further refine and define the dataset for implementation. Results In total, 38 participants completed round 1 of the e-Delphi. Qualitative content analysis of their responses generated 1072 codes, which were condensed into 39 categories and 209 subcategories. Following two rounds of rating (round 2: n=32 participants; round 3: n=28 participants), consensus was reached for 124 items. Four consensus meetings (n=14 participants) resulted in the final dataset which included 42 items across six domains: (1) patient demographics, (2) premorbid health and psychosocial information, (3) admission information, (4) service delivery and interventions, (5) outcomes and (6) caregiver information and outcomes. Conclusions We identified 42 items that reflect the values and experiences of rehabilitation stakeholders. Items unique to this dataset include caregiver information and outcomes, and detailed service delivery and intervention data. Future research will establish the feasibility of collection in practice.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]   Stability of response characteristics of a Delphi panel: Application of bootstrap data expansion [J].
Akins R.B. ;
Tolson H. ;
Cole B.R. .
BMC Medical Research Methodology, 5 (1)
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2017, Rehabilitation 2030: A Call For Action Meeting Report (February 67, 2017) (9789240007208
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2006, Redefining Healthcare: Creating Value Based Competition on Results
[4]   Standardising outcomes for clinical trials and systematic reviews [J].
Clarke, Mike .
TRIALS, 2007, 8 (1)
[5]   The facilitators and barriers to implementing patient reported outcome measures in organisations delivering health related services: A systematic review of reviews [J].
Foster A. ;
Croot L. ;
Brazier J. ;
Harris J. ;
O’cathain A. .
Journal of Patient-Reported Outcomes, 2 (1)
[6]   Rehabilitation: a rising demand that calls for action [J].
Garcia de Goulart, Barbara Niegia ;
Anderle, Paula .
CODAS, 2020, 32 (02)
[7]   Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness [J].
Graneheim, UH ;
Lundman, B .
NURSE EDUCATION TODAY, 2004, 24 (02) :105-112
[8]  
Group Techniques for Program Planning, 1976, J APPL BEHAV SCI, V12, P581
[9]   GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes [J].
Guyatt, Gordon H. ;
Oxman, Andrew D. ;
Kunz, Regina ;
Atkins, David ;
Brozek, Jan ;
Vist, Gunn ;
Alderson, Philip ;
Glasziou, Paul ;
Falck-Ytter, Yngve ;
Schuenemann, Holger J. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2011, 64 (04) :395-400
[10]   Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique [J].
Hasson, F ;
Keeney, S ;
McKenna, H .
JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 2000, 32 (04) :1008-1015