Development, feasibility testing, and preliminary evaluation of the Communication with an Artificial airway Tool (CAT): Results of the Crit-CAT pilot study

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

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.