Identification of Research Priorities for Inflammatory Bowel Disease Nursing in Europe: A Nurses-European Crohn's and Colitis Organisation Delphi Survey

For which topic were research priorities identified?

inflammatory bowel disease nursing

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

Europe

Why was it conducted at all?

Robust research evidence should inform clinical practice of inflammatory bowel disease [IBD] specialist nurses, but such research is currently very limited, with no current agreement on research priorities for IBD nursing.

What was the objective?

to establish topics to guide future inflammatory bowel disease nursing research across Europe

What was the outcome?

a list of 10 research questions

How long did the research prioritization take?

June 2015 - December 2015

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?

Delphi

How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: Delphi round 1: collecting research questions relating to service organization, patient care, quality of life, symptom management and the role of IBD nursing and AHP practice. Step 2: data processing: content analysis: 125 research topics suggested. Step 3: Delphi round 2: participants were asked to rate each topic. Step 4: data processing: merging similar questions, generating 44 composite research questions. Step 5: Delphi round 3: participants were asked to select from the list of 44 composite research questions the five questions they felt were most important and to rank these in their priority order

Which stakeholders took part?

Nurse and allied health professional members of the Nurses European Crohn's and Colitis organization. Delphi round 1: 88 participants. Delphi round 2: 90 participants., Delphi round 3: 59 participants.

How were stakeholders recruited?

Convenience sample: all nurse and AHP members of ECCO were invited to participate by the ECCO office personnel.

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.