1
|
Incze MA, Huebler S, Szczotka K, Grant S, Kertesz SG, Gordon AJ. Expert Panel Consensus on the Effectiveness and Implementation of Models to Support Posthospitalization Care Transitions for People With Substance Use Disorders. J Addict Med 2024; 18:696-704. [PMID: 39221815 DOI: 10.1097/adm.0000000000001369] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/04/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Hospitals are increasingly offering treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs) during medical admissions. However, there is a lack of consensus on the best approach to facilitating a successful transition to long-term medical and SUD care after hospitalization. We aimed to establish a hierarchy of existing SUD care transition models in 2 categories-effectiveness and implementation-using an expert consensus approach. METHODS We conducted a modified online Delphi study that convened 25 interdisciplinary clinicians with experience facilitating posthospitalization care transitions for patients with SUD. Panelists rated 10 prespecified posthospitalization care transition models according to 6 criteria concerning each model's anticipated effectiveness (eg, linkage to care, treatment retention) and implementation (eg, feasibility, acceptability). Ratings were made on a 9-point bidirectional scale. Group consensus was determined using the interpercentile range adjusted for symmetry. RESULTS After 3 rounds of the Delphi process (96% retention across all 3 rounds), consensus was reached on all 60 rating criteria. Interdisciplinary addiction consult teams (ACTs) and in-reach from partnering outpatient clinics were rated highest for effectiveness. Interdisciplinary ACTs and bridge clinics were rated highest for implementation. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment; protocol implementation; and postdischarge outreach received the lowest ratings overall. Feasibility of implementation was perceived as the largest challenge for all highly rated models. CONCLUSIONS An expert consensus approach including diverse clinician stakeholders found that interdisciplinary ACT, in-reach from partnering outpatient clinics, and bridge clinics had the greatest potential to enhance posthospitalization care transitions for patients with SUD when considering both perceived effectiveness and implementation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael A Incze
- From the Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT (MAI); Program for Addiction Research, Clinical Care, Knowledge, and Advocacy (PARCKA); Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT (MAI, SH, KS, AJG); Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT (SH, KS, AJG); University of Oregon, Eugene, OR (SG); and Birmingham Alabama Veterans Affairs Health Care System and University of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL (SGK)
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Schults JA, Charles KR, Harnischfeger J, Ware RS, Royle RH, Byrnes JM, Long DA, Ullman AJ, Raman S, Waak M, Lake A, Cooke M, Irwin A, Tume L, Hall L. Implementing paediatric appropriate use criteria for endotracheal suction to reduce complications in mechanically ventilated children with respiratory infections. Aust Crit Care 2024; 37:34-42. [PMID: 38142148 DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2023.09.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2023] [Revised: 09/11/2023] [Accepted: 09/15/2023] [Indexed: 12/25/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Endotracheal suction is used to maintain endotracheal tube patency. There is limited guidance to inform clinical practice for children with respiratory infections. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to determine whether implementation of a paediatric endotracheal suction appropriate use guideline Paediatric AirWay Suction (PAWS) is associated with an increased use of appropriate and decreased use of inappropriate suction interventions. METHODS A mixed-method, pre-implementation-post-implementation study was conducted between September 2021 and April 2022. Suction episodes in mechanically ventilated children with a respiratory infection were eligible. Using a structured approach, we implemented the PAWS guideline in a single paediatric intensive care unit. Evaluation included clinical (e.g., suction intervention appropriateness), implementation (e.g., acceptability), and cost outcomes (implementation costs). Associations between implementation of the PAWS guideline and appropriateness of endotracheal suction intervention use were investigated using generalised linear models. RESULTS Data from 439 eligible suctions were included in the analysis. Following PAWS implementation, inappropriate endotracheal tube intervention use reduced from 99% to 58%, an absolute reduction (AR) of 41% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 25%, 56%). Reductions were most notable for open suction systems (AR: 48%; 95% CI: 30%, 65%), 0.9% sodium chloride use (AR: 23%; 95% CI: 8%, 38%) and presuction and postsuction manual bagging (38%; 95% CI: 16%, 60%, and 86%; 95% CI: 73%, 99%), respectively. Clinicians perceived PAWS as acceptable and suitable for use. CONCLUSIONS Implementation of endotracheal tube suction appropriate use guidelines in a mixed paediatric intensive care unit was associated with a large reduction in inappropriate suction intervention use in paediatric patients with respiratory infections.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica A Schults
- Metro North Health, Herston Infectious Disease Institute, Queensland, Australia; The University of Queensland, School of Nursing Midwifery and Social Work, Australia; The University of Queensland, Children's Health Research Centre, Australia; Queensland Children's Hospital, Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Queensland, Australia; Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia.
| | - Karina R Charles
- The University of Queensland, School of Nursing Midwifery and Social Work, Australia; The University of Queensland, Children's Health Research Centre, Australia; Queensland Children's Hospital, Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Queensland, Australia
| | - Jane Harnischfeger
- The University of Queensland, School of Nursing Midwifery and Social Work, Australia; Queensland Children's Hospital, Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Queensland, Australia
| | - Robert S Ware
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia; School of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia
| | - Ruth H Royle
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia
| | - Joshua M Byrnes
- Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia; Centre for Applied Health Economics, School of Medicine and Dentistry, Griffith University, Australia
| | - Debbie A Long
- The University of Queensland, Children's Health Research Centre, Australia; Queensland Children's Hospital, Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Queensland, Australia; School of Nursing, Centre for Healthcare Transformation, Queensland University of Technology, Queensland, Australia
| | - Amanda J Ullman
- The University of Queensland, School of Nursing Midwifery and Social Work, Australia; The University of Queensland, Children's Health Research Centre, Australia; Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia; Children's Health Queensland Hospital and Health Service, Queensland, Australia
| | - Sainath Raman
- The University of Queensland, Children's Health Research Centre, Australia; Queensland Children's Hospital, Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Queensland, Australia
| | - Michaela Waak
- The University of Queensland, Children's Health Research Centre, Australia; Queensland Children's Hospital, Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Queensland, Australia
| | - Anna Lake
- The University of Queensland, Children's Health Research Centre, Australia
| | - Marie Cooke
- School of Nursing & Midwifery, Griffith University, Australia
| | - Adam Irwin
- The University of Queensland, Centre for Clinical Research, The University of Queensland, Queensland, Australia; Infection Management and Prevention Service, Queensland Children's Hospital, Queensland, Australia
| | - Lyvonne Tume
- Faculty of Health, Social Care & Medicine, Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK; Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Alder Hey Children's Hospital, Liverpool, UK
| | - Lisa Hall
- Metro North Health, Herston Infectious Disease Institute, Queensland, Australia; School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Khodyakov D, Grant S, Kroger J, Gadwah-Meaden C, Motala A, Larkin J. Disciplinary trends in the use of the Delphi method: A bibliometric analysis. PLoS One 2023; 18:e0289009. [PMID: 37582076 PMCID: PMC10427003 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2023] [Accepted: 07/10/2023] [Indexed: 08/17/2023] Open
Abstract
The Delphi method is an iterative, anonymous, group-based process for eliciting and aggregating opinion on a topic to explore the existence of consensus among experts. The year 2023 marks the 60th anniversary of the first peer-reviewed journal article on the Delphi method. Originally developed for operations research, this method is now applied extensively by researchers representing diverse scientific fields. We used a bibliometric analysis to describe general trends in the expansion of its use across disciplines over time. We conducted a systematic literature search for all English-language, peer-reviewed journal articles on the Delphi method through its first 60 years. We found 19,831 articles: 96.8% (n = 19,204) on the actual use of the Delphi method in an empirical study and 3.2% (n = 627) describing, examining, or providing some guidance on how to use the Delphi method. Almost half (49.9%) of all articles were published in the 2010s and an additional third (32.5%) in the first few years of the 2020s. Nearly two-thirds (65%, n = 12,883) of all published articles have appeared in medical journals, compared to 15% in science and technology (n = 3,053) or social science (n = 3,016) journals. We conclude that the expanded use of the Delphi method has been driven largely by the medical field, though social scientists and technologists continue to be at the forefront of methodological work on the Delphi method. Therefore, we call for greater transdisciplinary collaboration on methodological guidance and standards for the Delphi method.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dmitry Khodyakov
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, United States of America
| | - Sean Grant
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, United States of America
- HEDCO Institute for Evidence-Based Educational Practice, College of Education, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, United States of America
| | - Jack Kroger
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, United States of America
- Pardee RAND Graduate School, Santa Monica, California, United States of America
| | - Catria Gadwah-Meaden
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, United States of America
- Pardee RAND Graduate School, Santa Monica, California, United States of America
| | - Aneesa Motala
- RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, United States of America
| | - Jody Larkin
- RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America
| |
Collapse
|