Cargando…
Consensus on patient cases for hospitalised children with a high paediatric track and trigger tool score that raises no mounting concern: a Delphi process study
BACKGROUND: Paediatric track and trigger tools (PTTTs) based on vital parameters have been implemented in hospitals worldwide to help healthcare professionals identify signs of critical illness and incipient deterioration in hospitalised children. It has been documented that nurses do not use PTTT a...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9272132/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36053613 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2022-001564 |
_version_ | 1784744829515726848 |
---|---|
author | Jensen, Claus Sixtus Olesen, Hanne Vebert Kirkegaard, Hans Lisby, Marianne |
author_facet | Jensen, Claus Sixtus Olesen, Hanne Vebert Kirkegaard, Hans Lisby, Marianne |
author_sort | Jensen, Claus Sixtus |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Paediatric track and trigger tools (PTTTs) based on vital parameters have been implemented in hospitals worldwide to help healthcare professionals identify signs of critical illness and incipient deterioration in hospitalised children. It has been documented that nurses do not use PTTT as intended, but deviate from PTTT protocols because, in some situations, PTTT observations make little sense to them. The present study aimed to reach consensus on whether automatically generated PTTT scores that are higher than deemed reasonable by healthcare professionals according to their professional experience and clinical expertise may be downgraded. METHODS: A two-round modified Delphi technique was used to explore consensus on 14 patient cases for hospitalised children with a high PTTT score that did not raise concerns by systematically collating questionnaire responses. Participants rated their level of agreement on a 9-point Likert scale. IQR and median were calculated for each case. FINDINGS: A total of 221 participants completed round 1 and 101 participants completed round 2. Across the two rounds, majority of the participants were from paediatric departments, nurses and women. In round 1, consensus on inclusion was reached on 2 of the 14 cases. In round 2, consensus was reached on one additional patient case. Three of the 11 non-consensus cases remaining after rounds 1 and 2 were included by the research group based on predefined criteria. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, a consensus opinion was achieved on six patient cases where the child had a high PTTT score but where the healthcare professionals were not as concerned as indicated by the PTTT score. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9272132 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92721322022-07-28 Consensus on patient cases for hospitalised children with a high paediatric track and trigger tool score that raises no mounting concern: a Delphi process study Jensen, Claus Sixtus Olesen, Hanne Vebert Kirkegaard, Hans Lisby, Marianne BMJ Paediatr Open Accident & Emergency BACKGROUND: Paediatric track and trigger tools (PTTTs) based on vital parameters have been implemented in hospitals worldwide to help healthcare professionals identify signs of critical illness and incipient deterioration in hospitalised children. It has been documented that nurses do not use PTTT as intended, but deviate from PTTT protocols because, in some situations, PTTT observations make little sense to them. The present study aimed to reach consensus on whether automatically generated PTTT scores that are higher than deemed reasonable by healthcare professionals according to their professional experience and clinical expertise may be downgraded. METHODS: A two-round modified Delphi technique was used to explore consensus on 14 patient cases for hospitalised children with a high PTTT score that did not raise concerns by systematically collating questionnaire responses. Participants rated their level of agreement on a 9-point Likert scale. IQR and median were calculated for each case. FINDINGS: A total of 221 participants completed round 1 and 101 participants completed round 2. Across the two rounds, majority of the participants were from paediatric departments, nurses and women. In round 1, consensus on inclusion was reached on 2 of the 14 cases. In round 2, consensus was reached on one additional patient case. Three of the 11 non-consensus cases remaining after rounds 1 and 2 were included by the research group based on predefined criteria. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, a consensus opinion was achieved on six patient cases where the child had a high PTTT score but where the healthcare professionals were not as concerned as indicated by the PTTT score. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-07-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9272132/ /pubmed/36053613 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2022-001564 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Accident & Emergency Jensen, Claus Sixtus Olesen, Hanne Vebert Kirkegaard, Hans Lisby, Marianne Consensus on patient cases for hospitalised children with a high paediatric track and trigger tool score that raises no mounting concern: a Delphi process study |
title | Consensus on patient cases for hospitalised children with a high paediatric track and trigger tool score that raises no mounting concern: a Delphi process study |
title_full | Consensus on patient cases for hospitalised children with a high paediatric track and trigger tool score that raises no mounting concern: a Delphi process study |
title_fullStr | Consensus on patient cases for hospitalised children with a high paediatric track and trigger tool score that raises no mounting concern: a Delphi process study |
title_full_unstemmed | Consensus on patient cases for hospitalised children with a high paediatric track and trigger tool score that raises no mounting concern: a Delphi process study |
title_short | Consensus on patient cases for hospitalised children with a high paediatric track and trigger tool score that raises no mounting concern: a Delphi process study |
title_sort | consensus on patient cases for hospitalised children with a high paediatric track and trigger tool score that raises no mounting concern: a delphi process study |
topic | Accident & Emergency |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9272132/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36053613 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2022-001564 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jensenclaussixtus consensusonpatientcasesforhospitalisedchildrenwithahighpaediatrictrackandtriggertoolscorethatraisesnomountingconcernadelphiprocessstudy AT olesenhannevebert consensusonpatientcasesforhospitalisedchildrenwithahighpaediatrictrackandtriggertoolscorethatraisesnomountingconcernadelphiprocessstudy AT kirkegaardhans consensusonpatientcasesforhospitalisedchildrenwithahighpaediatrictrackandtriggertoolscorethatraisesnomountingconcernadelphiprocessstudy AT lisbymarianne consensusonpatientcasesforhospitalisedchildrenwithahighpaediatrictrackandtriggertoolscorethatraisesnomountingconcernadelphiprocessstudy |