Consensus on items and quantities of clinical equipment required to deal with a mass casualties big bang incident: a national Delphi study

Outcomes of home design to support healthy cognitive ageing: modified e-Delphi exercise with older people and housing-related professionals

BACKGROUND

There is emerging agreement that living in a home designed to support healthy cognitive ageing can enable people to live better with dementia and cognitive change. However, existing literature has used a variety of outcome measures that have infrequently been informed by the perspectives of older people or of professional in design and supply of housing. The DesHCA (Designing Homes for Healthy Cognitive Ageing) study aimed to identify outcomes that were meaningful for these groups and to understand their content and meanings.

METHODS

A presurvey of older people and housing professionals (n = 62) identified potential outcomes. These were then used in three rounds of a modified e-Delphi exercise with a panel of older people and housing professionals (n = 74) to test meanings and identify areas of agreement and disagreement. Descriptive statistics were used to present findings from previous rounds.

RESULTS

The survey confirmed a wide range of possible outcomes considered important. Through the e-Delphi rounds, panellists prioritised outcomes relating to living at home that could be influenced by design, and clarified their understanding of the meanings of outcomes. In subsequent rounds, they commented on earlier results. The exercise enabled five key outcome areas to be identified - staying independent, feeling safe, living in an adaptable home, enabling physical activity and enabling enjoyed activities- which were then tested for their content and applicability in panellists' views.

CONCLUSION

The five key outcome areas appeared meaningful to panellists, whilst also demonstrating nuanced meanings. They indicate useful outcomes for future research, though will require careful definition in each case to become measures. Importantly, they are informed by the views of those most immediately affected by better or poorer home design.

Hospitals as disaster victims: Lessons not learned?

OBJECTIVE

Hospitals are a key component to disaster response but are susceptible to the effects of disasters as well, including infrastructure damage that disrupts patient care. These events offer an opportunity for evaluation and improvement of preparedness and response efforts when hospitals are affected directly by a disaster. The objective of this structured review was to evaluate the existing literature on hospitals as disaster victims.

METHODS

A structured and scoping review of peer-reviewed literature, gray literature, and news reports related to hospitals as disaster victims was completed to identify and analyze themes and lessons observed from disasters in which hospitals are victims, to aid in future emergency operations planning and disaster response.

RESULTS

The literature search and secondary search of referenes identified 366 records in English. A variety of common barriers to successful disaster response include loss of power, water, heating and ventilation, communications, health information technology, staffing, supplies, safety and security, and structural and non-structural damage.

CONCLUSIONS

There are common weaknesses in disaster preparedness that we can learn from and account for in future planning with the aim of improving resilience in the face of future disasters.

Cancer Hospital Stockpiles: Strategizing for an Efficient and Sufficient Inventory List of Essential Items

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected health care systems worldwide, resulting in critical shortages of essential items and materials. The available guidelines are of little use for cancer hospitals in low-income and low-middle-income countries. They have been designed for community hospitals serving in a centralized health care network. This study aimed to draft and field test a framework to establish a list of essential supplies that should be stockpiled for subsequent waves of the COVID-19 virus by a tertiary care cancer hospital in a low-middle-income country.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A model was formulated using the consumption trends during the peak month of the first wave of COVID-19 infection to compile a list of essential materials and supplies. Furthermore, costing analyses were conducted to determine the financial benefits of stockpiling.

RESULTS

A proposed list of items to stockpile, including personal protective equipment, radiology supplies, laboratory reagents, medication, and oxygen, was shared with the hospital administration. However, the hospital administration only accepted the proposals for stockpiling personal protective equipment and oxygen.

CONCLUSION

This paper provides a framework and strategies that cancer hospitals and health care systems can modify and use as per individual, institutional requirements and specifications for stockpiling essential items during the COVID-19 or other similar pandemics.

Developing a reporting guideline to improve meta-ethnography in health research: the eMERGe mixed-methods study

Background

Meta-ethnography is a commonly used methodology for qualitative evidence synthesis. Research has identified that the quality of reporting of published meta-ethnographies is often poor and this has limited the utility of meta-ethnography findings to influence policy and practice.

Objective

To develop guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting.

Methods/design

The meta-ethnography reporting guidance (eMERGe) study followed the recommended approach for developing health research reporting guidelines and used a systematic mixed-methods approach. It comprised (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance in the conduct and reporting of meta-ethnography; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies, along with interviews with meta-ethnography end-users, to identify good practice principles; (3) a consensus workshop and two eDelphi (Version 1, Duncan E, Swinger K, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK) studies to agree guidance content; and (4) the development of the guidance table and explanatory notes.

Results

Results from the methodological systematic review and the audit of published meta-ethnographies revealed that more guidance was required around the reporting of all phases of meta-ethnography conduct and, in particular, the synthesis phases 4–6 (relating studies, translating studies into one another and synthesising translations). Following the guidance development process, the eMERGe reporting guidance was produced, comprising 19 items grouped into the seven phases of meta-ethnography.

Limitations

The finalised guidance has not yet been evaluated in practice; therefore, it is not possible at this stage to comment on its utility. However, we look forward to evaluating its uptake and usability in the future.

Conclusions

The eMERGe reporting guidance has been developed following a rigorous process in line with guideline development recommendations. The guidance is intended to improve the clarity and completeness of reporting of meta-ethnographies, and to facilitate use of the findings within the guidance to inform the design and delivery of services and interventions in health, social care and other fields. The eMERGe project developed a range of training materials to support use of the guidance, which is freely available atwww.emergeproject.org(accessed 26 March 2018). Meta-ethnography is an evolving qualitative evidence synthesis methodology and future research should refine the guidance to accommodate future methodological developments. We will also investigate the impact of the eMERGe reporting guidance with a view to updating the guidance.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015024709 for the stage 1 systematic review.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage: A consensus survey among Dutch and Chinese colorectal surgeons

AIM

To determine the level of consensus on the definition of colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) among Dutch and Chinese colorectal surgeons.

METHODS

Dutch and Chinese colorectal surgeons were asked to partake in an online questionnaire. Consensus in the online questionnaire was defined as > 80% agreement between respondents on various statements regarding a general definition of CAL, and regarding clinical and radiological diagnosis of the complication.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine Dutch and 202 Chinese dedicated colorectal surgeons participated in the online survey. Consensus was found on only one of the proposed elements of a general definition of CAL in both countries: ‘extravasation of contrast medium after rectal enema on a CT scan’. Another two were found relevant according to Dutch surgeons: ‘necrosis of the anastomosis found during reoperation’, and ‘a radiological collection treated with percutaneous drainage’. No consensus was found for all other proposed elements that may be included in a general definition.

CONCLUSION

There is no universally accepted definition of CAL in the Netherlands and China. Diagnosis of CAL based on clinical manifestations remains a point of discussion in both countries. Dutch surgeons are more likely to report ‘subclinical’ leaks as CAL, which partly explains the higher reported Dutch CAL rates.

Prioritizing novel and existing ambulance performance measures through expert and lay consensus: A three-stage multimethod consensus study

Background

Current ambulance quality and performance measures, such as response times, do not reflect the wider scope of care that services now provide. Using a three‐stage consensus process, we aimed to identify new ways of measuring ambulance service quality and performance that represent service provider and public perspectives.

Design

A multistakeholder consensus event, modified Delphi study, and patient and public consensus workshop.

Setting and participants

Representatives from ambulance services, patient and public involvement (PPI) groups, emergency care clinical academics, commissioners and policymakers.

Results

Nine measures/principles were highly prioritized by >75% of consensus event participants, including measures relating to pain, patient experience, accuracy of dispatch decisions and patient safety. Twenty experts participated in two Delphi rounds to further refine and prioritize measures; 20 measures in three domains scored ≥8/9, indicating good consensus, including proportion of calls correctly prioritized, time to definitive care and measures related to pain. Eighteen patient/public representatives attended a consensus workshop, and six measures were identified as important. These include time to definitive care, response time, reduction in pain scores, calls correctly prioritized to appropriate levels of response and survival to hospital discharge for treatable emergency conditions.

Conclusions

Using consensus methods, we identified a shortlist of ambulance outcome and performance measures that are important to ambulance clinicians and service providers, service users, commissioners, and clinical academics, reflecting current pre‐hospital ambulance care and services. The measures can potentially be used to assess pre‐hospital quality or performance over time, with most calculated using routinely available data.

How to Choose? Using the Delphi Method to Develop Consensus Triggers and Indicators for Disaster Response

OBJECTIVE

To identify key decisions along the continuum of care (conventional, contingency, and crisis) and the critical triggers and data elements used to inform those decisions concerning public health and health care response during an emergency.

METHODS

A classic Delphi method, a consensus-building survey technique, was used with clinicians around Washington State to identify regional triggers and indicators. Additionally, using a modified Delphi method, we combined a workshop and single-round survey with panelists from public health (state and local) and health care coalitions to identify consensus state-level triggers and indicators.

RESULTS

In the clinical survey, 122 of 223 proposed triggers or indicators (43.7%) reached consensus and were deemed important in regional decision-making during a disaster. In the state-level survey, 110 of 140 proposed triggers or indicators (78.6%) reached consensus and were deemed important in state-level decision-making during a disaster.

CONCLUSIONS

The identification of consensus triggers and indicators for health care emergency response is crucial in supporting a comprehensive health care situational awareness process. This can inform the creation of standardized questions to ask health care, public health, and other partners to support decision-making during a response. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2017;11:467-472).

The Development of Criteria for the Selection of Chinese Peer Educators in HIV Management: A Delphi Study

To develop an expert consensus opinion of the criteria for selection of peer educator for HIV/AIDS care program, twenty experts were invited to complete a two-round Delphi consultation. Response rates of the panelists for the first and second rounds were both 100%, and the authority coefficient of the experts was 0.75. Experts achieved consensus on a total of nine items (75%) on completion of the study. The Precedence Chart Method was used to calculate the weight of each indicator, and then a priority list was generated accordingly. This study provides the initial selection criteria for HIV/AIDS peer educators in Shanghai as well as in China.

Protocol-developing meta-ethnography reporting guidelines (eMERGe)

Background

Designing and implementing high-quality health care services and interventions requires robustly synthesised evidence. Syntheses of qualitative research studies can provide evidence of patients’ experiences of health conditions; intervention feasibility, appropriateness and acceptability to patients; and advance understanding of health care issues. The unique, interpretive, theory-based meta-ethnography synthesis approach is suited to conveying patients’ views and developing theory to inform service design and delivery. However, meta-ethnography reporting is often poor quality, which discourages trust in, and use of, meta-ethnography findings. Users of evidence syntheses require reports that clearly articulate analytical processes and findings. Tailored research reporting guidelines can raise reporting standards but none exists for meta-ethnography. This study aims to create an evidence-based meta-ethnography reporting guideline articulating the methodological standards and depth of reporting required to improve reporting quality.

Methods/design

The mixed-methods design of this National Institute of Health Research-funded study (http://www.stir.ac.uk/emerge/) follows good practice in research reporting guideline development comprising: (1) a methodological systematic review (PROSPERO registration: CRD42015024709) to identify recommendations and guidance in conducting/reporting meta-ethnography; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies to identify good practice principles and develop standards in conduct/reporting; (3) an online workshop and Delphi studies to agree guideline content with 45 international qualitative synthesis experts and 45 other stakeholders including patients; (4) development and wide dissemination of the guideline and its accompanying detailed explanatory document, a report template for National Institute of Health Research commissioned meta-ethnographies, and training materials on guideline use.

Discussion

Meta-ethnography, devised in the field of education, is now used widely in other disciplines. Methodological advances relevant to meta-ethnography conduct exist. The extent of discipline-specific adaptations of meta-ethnography and the fit of any adaptions with the underpinning philosophy of meta-ethnography require investigation. Well-reported meta-ethnography findings could inform clinical decision-making. A bespoke meta-ethnography reporting guideline is needed to improve reporting quality, but to be effective potential users must know it exists, trust it and use it. Therefore, a rigorous study has been designed to develop and promote a guideline. By raising reporting quality, the guideline will maximise the likelihood that high-quality meta-ethnographies will contribute robust evidence to improve health care and patient outcomes.