卒中护理缺口优先排序:两轮德尔菲过程。

IF 5.8 3区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Elke Ge Mathijssen, Jaap Ca Trappenburg, Mark J Alberts, Angelique Balguid, Robert J Dempsey, Mayank Goyal, Bianca Ta de Greef, Marjan J Hummel, Koji Iihara, Enrique C Leira, Winston Lim, Gregory Yh Lip, Paolo Madeddu, Randolph S Marshall, Dominick Jh McCabe, Ahmad S Muda, Dimitrios N Nikas, George Ntaios, Terence J Quinn, Marta Rubiera, Tatjana Rundek, Shashank Shekhar, Wen-Jun Tu, Pearl Vyas, Wim van Zwam, Johannes B Reitsma, Ewoud Schuit
{"title":"卒中护理缺口优先排序:两轮德尔菲过程。","authors":"Elke Ge Mathijssen, Jaap Ca Trappenburg, Mark J Alberts, Angelique Balguid, Robert J Dempsey, Mayank Goyal, Bianca Ta de Greef, Marjan J Hummel, Koji Iihara, Enrique C Leira, Winston Lim, Gregory Yh Lip, Paolo Madeddu, Randolph S Marshall, Dominick Jh McCabe, Ahmad S Muda, Dimitrios N Nikas, George Ntaios, Terence J Quinn, Marta Rubiera, Tatjana Rundek, Shashank Shekhar, Wen-Jun Tu, Pearl Vyas, Wim van Zwam, Johannes B Reitsma, Ewoud Schuit","doi":"10.1177/23969873251329841","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite international recognition of stroke as a significant health priority, discrepancies persist between the target values for stroke quality measures and the actual values that are achieved in clinical practice, referred to as gaps. This study aimed to reach consensus among international experts on prioritizing gaps in stroke care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-round Delphi process was conducted, surveying an international expert panel in the field of stroke care and cerebrovascular medicine, including patient representatives, healthcare professionals, researchers, policymakers, and medical directors. Experts scored the importance and required effort to close 13 gaps throughout the stroke care continuum and proposed potential solutions. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the first and second Delphi rounds, 35 and 30 experts participated, respectively. Expert consensus was reached on the high importance of closing 11 out of 13 gaps. Two out of 13 gaps were considered moderately important to close, with expert consensus for one of these two gaps. Expert consensus indicated that only one gap, related to the prevention of complications after stroke, requires moderate effort to close, whereas the others were considered to require high effort to close. Key focus areas for potential solutions included: \"Care infrastructure,\" \"Geographic disparities,\" \"Interdisciplinary collaboration,\" and \"Advocacy and funding.\"</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While closing gaps in stroke care primarily requires high effort and substantial resources, targeted interventions in the identified key focus areas may provide feasible and clinically meaningful improvements.</p>","PeriodicalId":46821,"journal":{"name":"European Stroke Journal","volume":" ","pages":"23969873251329841"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11969492/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prioritizing gaps in stroke care: A two-round Delphi process.\",\"authors\":\"Elke Ge Mathijssen, Jaap Ca Trappenburg, Mark J Alberts, Angelique Balguid, Robert J Dempsey, Mayank Goyal, Bianca Ta de Greef, Marjan J Hummel, Koji Iihara, Enrique C Leira, Winston Lim, Gregory Yh Lip, Paolo Madeddu, Randolph S Marshall, Dominick Jh McCabe, Ahmad S Muda, Dimitrios N Nikas, George Ntaios, Terence J Quinn, Marta Rubiera, Tatjana Rundek, Shashank Shekhar, Wen-Jun Tu, Pearl Vyas, Wim van Zwam, Johannes B Reitsma, Ewoud Schuit\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23969873251329841\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite international recognition of stroke as a significant health priority, discrepancies persist between the target values for stroke quality measures and the actual values that are achieved in clinical practice, referred to as gaps. This study aimed to reach consensus among international experts on prioritizing gaps in stroke care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A two-round Delphi process was conducted, surveying an international expert panel in the field of stroke care and cerebrovascular medicine, including patient representatives, healthcare professionals, researchers, policymakers, and medical directors. Experts scored the importance and required effort to close 13 gaps throughout the stroke care continuum and proposed potential solutions. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the first and second Delphi rounds, 35 and 30 experts participated, respectively. Expert consensus was reached on the high importance of closing 11 out of 13 gaps. Two out of 13 gaps were considered moderately important to close, with expert consensus for one of these two gaps. Expert consensus indicated that only one gap, related to the prevention of complications after stroke, requires moderate effort to close, whereas the others were considered to require high effort to close. Key focus areas for potential solutions included: \\\"Care infrastructure,\\\" \\\"Geographic disparities,\\\" \\\"Interdisciplinary collaboration,\\\" and \\\"Advocacy and funding.\\\"</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While closing gaps in stroke care primarily requires high effort and substantial resources, targeted interventions in the identified key focus areas may provide feasible and clinically meaningful improvements.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46821,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Stroke Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"23969873251329841\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11969492/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Stroke Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23969873251329841\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Stroke Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23969873251329841","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管国际上承认卒中是一个重要的健康优先事项,但卒中质量测量的目标值与临床实践中实现的实际值之间仍然存在差异,称为差距。这项研究的目的是在国际专家之间就卒中护理的优先差距达成共识。方法:采用两轮德尔菲法,对卒中护理和脑血管医学领域的国际专家小组进行调查,包括患者代表、卫生保健专业人员、研究人员、政策制定者和医疗主任。专家们对缩小中风治疗连续过程中的13个差距的重要性和需要付出的努力进行了评分,并提出了潜在的解决方案。采用描述性统计和定性分析方法对资料进行分析。结果:第一轮和第二轮德尔菲分别有35名和30名专家参与。专家们就缩小13个差距中的11个的高度重要性达成了共识。13个缺口中的两个被认为是中等重要的,需要关闭,专家对这两个缺口中的一个达成共识。专家一致认为,只有一个与预防卒中后并发症有关的缺口需要中等程度的努力才能弥合,而其他缺口则被认为需要高度的努力才能弥合。潜在解决方案的重点领域包括:“护理基础设施”、“地理差异”、“跨学科合作”和“倡导和资助”。结论:虽然缩小卒中护理差距主要需要付出巨大的努力和大量的资源,但在确定的重点领域进行有针对性的干预可能会提供可行的和有临床意义的改善。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prioritizing gaps in stroke care: A two-round Delphi process.

Background: Despite international recognition of stroke as a significant health priority, discrepancies persist between the target values for stroke quality measures and the actual values that are achieved in clinical practice, referred to as gaps. This study aimed to reach consensus among international experts on prioritizing gaps in stroke care.

Methods: A two-round Delphi process was conducted, surveying an international expert panel in the field of stroke care and cerebrovascular medicine, including patient representatives, healthcare professionals, researchers, policymakers, and medical directors. Experts scored the importance and required effort to close 13 gaps throughout the stroke care continuum and proposed potential solutions. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis methods.

Results: In the first and second Delphi rounds, 35 and 30 experts participated, respectively. Expert consensus was reached on the high importance of closing 11 out of 13 gaps. Two out of 13 gaps were considered moderately important to close, with expert consensus for one of these two gaps. Expert consensus indicated that only one gap, related to the prevention of complications after stroke, requires moderate effort to close, whereas the others were considered to require high effort to close. Key focus areas for potential solutions included: "Care infrastructure," "Geographic disparities," "Interdisciplinary collaboration," and "Advocacy and funding."

Conclusions: While closing gaps in stroke care primarily requires high effort and substantial resources, targeted interventions in the identified key focus areas may provide feasible and clinically meaningful improvements.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
6.60%
发文量
102
期刊介绍: Launched in 2016 the European Stroke Journal (ESJ) is the official journal of the European Stroke Organisation (ESO), a professional non-profit organization with over 1,400 individual members, and affiliations to numerous related national and international societies. ESJ covers clinical stroke research from all fields, including clinical trials, epidemiology, primary and secondary prevention, diagnosis, acute and post-acute management, guidelines, translation of experimental findings into clinical practice, rehabilitation, organisation of stroke care, and societal impact. It is open to authors from all relevant medical and health professions. Article types include review articles, original research, protocols, guidelines, editorials and letters to the Editor. Through ESJ, authors and researchers have gained a new platform for the rapid and professional publication of peer reviewed scientific material of the highest standards; publication in ESJ is highly competitive. The journal and its editorial team has developed excellent cooperation with sister organisations such as the World Stroke Organisation and the International Journal of Stroke, and the American Heart Organization/American Stroke Association and the journal Stroke. ESJ is fully peer-reviewed and is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Issues are published 4 times a year (March, June, September and December) and articles are published OnlineFirst prior to issue publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信