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

Author:

Freeman-Sanderson Amy1234,Brodsky Martin B.5,Dale Craig6,Gupta Anushua,Haines Kimberley7,Happ Mary Beth8,Hart Nicholas9,Hemsley Bronwyn1,Istanboulian Laura1011,Spronk Peter12,Sullivan Rebecca1,Sutt Anna-Liisa13,Rose Louise14

Affiliation:

1. Graduate School of Health, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

2. Department of Speech Pathology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

3. Critical Care Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

4. Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre (ANZIC-RC), School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

5. Head and Neck Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.

6. Lawrence S. Bloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

7. Department of Physiotherapy, Western Health, Department of Critical Care, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

8. The Ohio State University College of Nursing, Columbus, OH.

9. Guy’s and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.

10. Daphne Cockwell School of Nursing, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, ON, Canada.

11. Michael Garron Hospital, Toronto East Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.

12. Department of Intensive Care, Gelre Hospitals, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands.

13. Critical Care Research Group, The Prince Charles Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.

14. Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery and Palliative Care, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom.

Abstract

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.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3