Using the delphi approach to identify priority areas for health visiting practice in an area of deprivation

Development of a framework for the collaborative adaptation of service models for child and family health in diverse settings (CASCADES)

The impact of health service access disparities has significant implications for society. The importance of addressing health and social inequities is never more critical than in the early years of a child's life. Despite advances in healthcare implementation, there is a lack of an evidence-based framework to specifically guide the adaptation of child and family health (CFH) service models for different community contexts. This paper describes the development of a framework for the adaptation of community-based CFH service models. Drawing on the findings of an integrative review and Delphi study, Participatory Action Research was used to test the framework, resulting in the Framework for Collaborative Adaptation of Service Models for Child and Family Health in Diverse Settings (CASCADES). The Framework uses the analogy of a waterfall to represent the iterative process of collecting information to inform each step. The framework supports a collaborative co-design approach to build a comprehensive understanding of the target community to inform the adaptation and evaluation of evidence-based interventions appropriate to the local context. The ultimate aim is to enable the delivery of services that are contextually relevant for local communities and provide greater access to effective, accessible services to support children and their families.

Consensus building on definitions and types of child maltreatment to improve recording and surveillance in Europe: protocol for a multi-sectoral, European, electronic Delphi study

INTRODUCTION

Child maltreatment (CM) is a complex global public health issue with potentially devastating effects on individuals' physical and mental health and well-being throughout the life course. A lack of uniform definitions hinders attempts to identify, measure, respond to, and prevent CM. The aim of this electronic Delphi (e-Delphi) study is to build consensus on definitions and types of CM for use in surveillance and multi-sectoral research in the 34 countries in the Euro-CAN (Multi-Sectoral Responses to Child Abuse and Neglect in Europe) project (COST Action CA19106).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The e-Delphi study will consist of a maximum of three rounds conducted using an online data collection platform. A multi-disciplinary expert panel consisting of researchers, child protection professionals (health and social care), police, legal professionals and adult survivors of CM will be purposefully recruited. We will approach approximately 100 experts, with between 50 and 60 of these anticipated to take part. Participants will rate their agreement with a range of statements relating to operational definitions and types of CM, and free-text comments on each of the statements to give further detail about their responses and areas of uncertainty. Consensus has been defined a priori as ≥70% of the panel agreeing or disagreeing with the statement after the final round. The responses to the open-ended questions will be analysed using a 'codebook' approach to thematic analysis, and used to refine the statements between rounds where no consensus is reached.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been granted from the Cardiff University School of Medicine ethics committee (reference number SMREC22/96). Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at workshops (including for the participants) and international academic conferences. The Euro-CAN network will also be used to disseminate the results, with results briefings and presentations to key public health and other relevant organisations in the field.

Comparing international dementia research priorities-Systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Research priority setting aims to collate stakeholder opinion to determine the most pressing research questions. Priority setting exercises influence decisions around research funding, development and policy. We compared published dementia research priority setting exercises from international healthcare systems.

METHODS

Four multidisciplinary, international, electronic databases were searched for relevant studies (2010 until 2021). Priorities were extracted, coded and assigned to categories using thematic analysis. The Nine Common Themes of Good Practice (9CTGP) and the Reporting guideline for priority setting of health research (REPRISE) checklists were used to assess methodological and reporting quality respectively.

RESULTS

From 265 titles, 10 priority setting exercises (1179 participants, 147 priorities) were included. Studies spanned four continents and the majority included people living with dementia and their care-givers in the priority setting process (68%). Only one paper met all the best practice indicators. Issues around inclusiveness, implementation and evaluation of the priorities were apparent in nine papers. We categorised priorities under eight themes: caregivers (25%, n = 37), support (24%, n = 35), awareness and education (16%, n = 24), drugs and interventions (14%, n = 21), diagnosis (8%, n = 12), pathology (6%, n = 9), research design (5%, n = 7), and prevention (1%, n = 2). Priorities varied by geographical region, with awareness and education of higher priority in low-middle income countries, compared to caregivers and support in high income countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Key priorities were identified with some commonality around themes considered of greatest importance. There is scope to improve the process and reporting of priority setting. Priorities differed according to contextual factors and so, priorities specific to one healthcare setting may not be applicable to others.

Adapting community child and family health service models for rural and other diverse settings: A modified Delphi study to identify key elements

Inequity in health outcomes is pervasive, with poorer health outcomes identified in rural, regional and remote communities. An international call to action emphasises the need for service models adapted for less well-resourced settings. The aim of this study was to identify key elements of a framework for the adaptation of specialist community-based child and family health (CFH) service models for rural and other under-resourced settings. A modified Delphi study was undertaken with a 12-person expert panel in CFH including Australian and international professionals and parents from rural and remote communities. The study was informed by the WHO Framework for Strengthening Health Service Systems building blocks, the outcomes of an integrative review of literature and a Participatory Action Research study. Experts assessed 107 potential elements for service model development and rated them for importance when adapting service models for different contexts. Round 1 of the Delphi generated considerable consensus with 80 of the 107 potential elements identified as necessary for the service model adaptation framework. A further 17 elements for CFH service models were added in round 2. While multiple varied elements are important for adapting CFH service models for diverse settings, some elements had common themes. Experts highlighted the importance of community engagement and participation; utilising both data and local knowledge to develop a robust understanding of the community context; and the need for a flexible approach to funding and modes of service delivery to address barriers to implementation and access.

Development of an 'Enteral tube feeding decision support tool' for hip fracture patients: A modified Delphi approach

OBJECTIVES

Malnutrition after hip fracture is recognised as the co-morbidity most likely to impact hospital length of stay and cost. Despite this, the role of enteral tube feeding in hip fracture patients remains unclear.

METHODS

A modified Delphi process was used to establish consensus for an enteral tube feeding decision support tool. Three rounds of the Delphi survey were administered to a purposeful sample of twenty multidisciplinary clinicians from the Australian and New Zealand Hip Fracture Registry.

RESULTS

Consensus markedly improved across the three rounds (33, 44 and 87%, respectively). More than 80% of participants positively supported implementing the tool in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes experienced, multidisciplinary clinician consensus and support for an 'Enteral tube feeding decision support tool' to be applied in acute hip fracture settings. Further studies are being undertaken to identify the impact of the checklist tool on informed consent decision processes in this population.