Kalu, Michael E. and Dal Bello-Haas, Vanina and Griffin, Meridith and Ploeg, Jenny and Richardson, Julie and Martinuzzi, Andrea (2022) A comprehensive mobility discharge assessment framework for older adults transitioning from hospital-to-home in the community—What mobility factors are critical to include? Protocol for an international e-Delphi study. PLOS ONE, 17 (9). e0267470. ISSN 1932-6203
journal.pone.0267470.pdf - Published Version
Download (882kB)
Abstract
Background
Mobility deficits have been identified as an independent risk factor for hospital readmission for adults ≥65 years. Despite evidence indicating how determinants additively influence and predict mobility, no hospital-to-home care transition models comprehensively assess all seven mobility determinants, cognitive, financial, environmental, personal, physical, psychological, and social. There is currently a lack of clarity regarding what factors clinicians and researchers should evaluate for each mobility determinant. The purpose of this e-Delphi study is to prioritize and reach consensus on the factors for each mobility determinant that are critical to assess as part of the Comprehensive Mobility Discharge Assessment Framework (CMDAF) when older adults are discharged from hospital-to-home.
Methods
This protocol paper is an international modified e-Delphi study following the Recommendations for the Conducting and Reporting of Delphi Studies. International researchers, clinicians, older adults and family caregivers residing in a country with universal or near-universal health coverage will be invited to participate as ‘experts’ in three e-Delphi rounds administered through DelphiManager©. The e-Delphi Round 1 questionnaire will be developed based on scoping review findings and will be pilot tested. For each round, experts will be asked to rate factors for each determinant that are critical to assess as part of the CMDAF using a 9-point scale: Not Important (1–3), Important but Not Critical (4–6), and Critical (7–9). The scale will include a selection option of "unable to score" and experts will also be asked to provide a rationale for their scoring and suggest missing factors. Experts will receive feedback summaries in Rounds 2 and 3 to guide them in reflecting on their initial responses and re-rating of factors that have not reached consensus. The criteria for reaching consensus will be if ≥70% of experts rate a factor as "critical" (scores ≥7) and ≤ 15% of experts rate a factor as "not important" (scores≤ 3). Quantitative data will be analyzed using median values, frequencies, percentages, interquartile range, and bar graphs; Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-rank test will be used to assess the stability of participants’ responses. Rationale (qualitative data) provided in the open-ended comments section will be analyzed using content analysis.
Conclusion
This study is a first step in developing the CMDAF and will be used to guide a subsequent e-Delphi survey to decide on the tools that should be used to measure the examples of each factor included in our framework.
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Subjects: | Journal Eprints > Medical Science |
Depositing User: | Managing Editor |
Date Deposited: | 30 Dec 2022 10:37 |
Last Modified: | 02 Mar 2024 04:30 |
URI: | http://repository.journal4submission.com/id/eprint/1245 |