A Delphi study of rescue and clinical subject matter experts on the extrication of patients following a motor vehicle collision

T Nutbeam; R Fenwick; JE Smith; M Dayson; B Carlin; M Wilson; L Wallis; W Stassen

doi:10.1186/s13049-022-01029-x

A Delphi study of rescue and clinical subject matter experts on the extrication of patients following a motor vehicle collision

T Nutbeam, R Fenwick, JE Smith, M Dayson, B Carlin, M Wilson, L Wallis, W Stassen

School of Health Professions

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundApproximately 1.3 million people die each year globally as a direct result of motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). Following an MVC some patients will remain trapped in their vehicle; these patients have worse outcomes and may require extrication. Following new evidence, updated multidisciplinary guidance for extrication is needed.MethodsThis Delphi study has been developed, conducted and reported to CREDES standards. A literature review identified areas of expertise and appropriate individuals were recruited to a Steering Group. The Steering Group formulated initial statements for consideration. Stakeholder organisations were invited to identify subject matter experts (SMEs) from a rescue and clinical background (total 60). SMEs participated over three rounds via an online platform. Consensus for agreement / disagreement was set at 70%. At each stage SMEs could offer feedback on, or modification to the statements considered which was reviewed and incorporated into new statements or new supporting information for the following rounds. Stakeholders agreed a set of principles based on the consensus statements on which future guidance should be based.ResultsSixty SMEs completed Round 1, 53 Round 2 (88%) and 49 Round 3 (82%). Consensus was reached on 91 statements (89 agree, 2 disagree) covering a broad range of domains related to: extrication terminology, extrication goals and approach, self-extrication, disentanglement, clinical care, immobilisation, patient-focused extrication, emergency services call and triage, and audit and research standards. Thirty-three statements did not reach consensus.ConclusionThis study has demonstrated consensus across a large panel of multidisciplinary SMEs on many key areas of extrication and related practice that will provide a key foundation in the development of evidence-based guidance for this subject area.

Original language	English
Number of pages	0
Journal	Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine
Volume	30
Issue number	1
Early online date	20 Jun 2022
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/s13049-022-01029-x
Publication status	Published - Dec 2022

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1186/s13049-022-01029-x

Cite this

@article{c58fe116e0e640d1bdf0be28d225a3f7,

title = "A Delphi study of rescue and clinical subject matter experts on the extrication of patients following a motor vehicle collision",

abstract = "AbstractBackgroundApproximately 1.3 million people die each year globally as a direct result of motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). Following an MVC some patients will remain trapped in their vehicle; these patients have worse outcomes and may require extrication. Following new evidence, updated multidisciplinary guidance for extrication is needed.MethodsThis Delphi study has been developed, conducted and reported to CREDES standards. A literature review identified areas of expertise and appropriate individuals were recruited to a Steering Group. The Steering Group formulated initial statements for consideration. Stakeholder organisations were invited to identify subject matter experts (SMEs) from a rescue and clinical background (total 60). SMEs participated over three rounds via an online platform. Consensus for agreement / disagreement was set at 70%. At each stage SMEs could offer feedback on, or modification to the statements considered which was reviewed and incorporated into new statements or new supporting information for the following rounds. Stakeholders agreed a set of principles based on the consensus statements on which future guidance should be based.ResultsSixty SMEs completed Round 1, 53 Round 2 (88%) and 49 Round 3 (82%). Consensus was reached on 91 statements (89 agree, 2 disagree) covering a broad range of domains related to: extrication terminology, extrication goals and approach, self-extrication, disentanglement, clinical care, immobilisation, patient-focused extrication, emergency services call and triage, and audit and research standards. Thirty-three statements did not reach consensus.ConclusionThis study has demonstrated consensus across a large panel of multidisciplinary SMEs on many key areas of extrication and related practice that will provide a key foundation in the development of evidence-based guidance for this subject area.",

author = "T Nutbeam and R Fenwick and JE Smith and M Dayson and B Carlin and M Wilson and L Wallis and W Stassen",

year = "2022",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1186/s13049-022-01029-x",

language = "English",

volume = "30",

journal = "Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine",

issn = "1757-7241",

publisher = "BioMed Central Ltd.",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Delphi study of rescue and clinical subject matter experts on the extrication of patients following a motor vehicle collision

AU - Nutbeam, T

AU - Fenwick, R

AU - Smith, JE

AU - Dayson, M

AU - Carlin, B

AU - Wilson, M

AU - Wallis, L

AU - Stassen, W

PY - 2022/12

Y1 - 2022/12

N2 - AbstractBackgroundApproximately 1.3 million people die each year globally as a direct result of motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). Following an MVC some patients will remain trapped in their vehicle; these patients have worse outcomes and may require extrication. Following new evidence, updated multidisciplinary guidance for extrication is needed.MethodsThis Delphi study has been developed, conducted and reported to CREDES standards. A literature review identified areas of expertise and appropriate individuals were recruited to a Steering Group. The Steering Group formulated initial statements for consideration. Stakeholder organisations were invited to identify subject matter experts (SMEs) from a rescue and clinical background (total 60). SMEs participated over three rounds via an online platform. Consensus for agreement / disagreement was set at 70%. At each stage SMEs could offer feedback on, or modification to the statements considered which was reviewed and incorporated into new statements or new supporting information for the following rounds. Stakeholders agreed a set of principles based on the consensus statements on which future guidance should be based.ResultsSixty SMEs completed Round 1, 53 Round 2 (88%) and 49 Round 3 (82%). Consensus was reached on 91 statements (89 agree, 2 disagree) covering a broad range of domains related to: extrication terminology, extrication goals and approach, self-extrication, disentanglement, clinical care, immobilisation, patient-focused extrication, emergency services call and triage, and audit and research standards. Thirty-three statements did not reach consensus.ConclusionThis study has demonstrated consensus across a large panel of multidisciplinary SMEs on many key areas of extrication and related practice that will provide a key foundation in the development of evidence-based guidance for this subject area.

AB - AbstractBackgroundApproximately 1.3 million people die each year globally as a direct result of motor vehicle collisions (MVCs). Following an MVC some patients will remain trapped in their vehicle; these patients have worse outcomes and may require extrication. Following new evidence, updated multidisciplinary guidance for extrication is needed.MethodsThis Delphi study has been developed, conducted and reported to CREDES standards. A literature review identified areas of expertise and appropriate individuals were recruited to a Steering Group. The Steering Group formulated initial statements for consideration. Stakeholder organisations were invited to identify subject matter experts (SMEs) from a rescue and clinical background (total 60). SMEs participated over three rounds via an online platform. Consensus for agreement / disagreement was set at 70%. At each stage SMEs could offer feedback on, or modification to the statements considered which was reviewed and incorporated into new statements or new supporting information for the following rounds. Stakeholders agreed a set of principles based on the consensus statements on which future guidance should be based.ResultsSixty SMEs completed Round 1, 53 Round 2 (88%) and 49 Round 3 (82%). Consensus was reached on 91 statements (89 agree, 2 disagree) covering a broad range of domains related to: extrication terminology, extrication goals and approach, self-extrication, disentanglement, clinical care, immobilisation, patient-focused extrication, emergency services call and triage, and audit and research standards. Thirty-three statements did not reach consensus.ConclusionThis study has demonstrated consensus across a large panel of multidisciplinary SMEs on many key areas of extrication and related practice that will provide a key foundation in the development of evidence-based guidance for this subject area.

U2 - 10.1186/s13049-022-01029-x

DO - 10.1186/s13049-022-01029-x

M3 - Article

SN - 1757-7241

VL - 30

JO - Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine

JF - Scandinavian Journal of Trauma, Resuscitation and Emergency Medicine

IS - 1

ER -

A Delphi study of rescue and clinical subject matter experts on the extrication of patients following a motor vehicle collision

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this