Determining Psychosocial Research Priorities for Adolescents with Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators Using Delphi Methodology
For which topic were research priorities identified?
adolescents with implantable cardioverter defibrillators
In which location was the research priority setting conducted?
North America - USA
Why was it conducted at all?
Adolescents with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) have unique psychosocial needs that are not currently addressed in the literature. Balancing the multidimensional needs of the adolescent with an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is essential. In a world of rapid technological and societal change, the benefit of a decrease in biological mortality, that is, lives saved, for adolescents with ICDs should not outweigh the benefits of potential psychosocial morbidity (ie, depression) and mortality (ie, suicide) associated with ICD placement. With multiple important issues to attend to, prioritizing a research agenda is essential. Thus, nurses and physicians who routinely care for these individuals need to arrive at a consensus on what psychosocial issues are of highest priority for these individuals and their families.
What was the objective?
to identify current psychosocial issues among adolescents with implantable cardioverter defibrillators by obtaining expert consensus from experienced pediatric dysrhythmia clinicians
What was the outcome?
a ranking list of 10 research topics
How long did the research prioritization take?
No information provided.
Which methods were used to identify research priorities?
How were the priorities for research identified exactly?
Step 1: Delphi round 1: survey asking participants: What do you consider the current psychosocial issues faced by adolescents with ICDs to be? What psychosocial issues do you spend the most time addressing with adolescents with ICDs and their families?, more than 50 psychosocial issues identified. Step 2: data processing: submissions condensed and categorized. Step 3: Delphi round 2: survey with 10 most frequently identified issues from round 1, participants were asked to rank them. Step 4: Delphi round 3: participants were simply asked to indicate their agreement or disagreement with group ranking of round 2, if they disagreed with ranking they were asked to re-rank
Which stakeholders took part?
Pediatric and young adult cardiovascular caregivers who specialize in rhythm disturbances: physicians, nurses, and other allied health personnel. Delphi round 1: 22 participants. Delphi round 3: 40 participants.
How were stakeholders recruited?
A multidisciplinary purposive sample was drawn from 2 international organizations of pediatric and young adult cardiovascular caregivers who specialize in rhythm disturbances. A multidisciplinary purposive sample was drawn from 2 international organizations of pediatric and young adult cardiovascular caregivers who specialize in caring for children and adolescents with cardiac dysrhythmias, including those with ICDs.
Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?
Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.