To identify and to establish research priorities for pediatric intensive care nursing science across Europe.
A modified three-round electronic Delphi technique was applied. Questionnaires were translated into seven different languages.
The participants included pediatric intensive care clinical nurses, managers, educators, and researchers. In round 1, the qualitative responses were analyzed by content analysis and a list of research statements and domains was generated. In rounds 2 and 3, the statements were ranked on a scale of one to six (not important to most important). Mean scores and SDs were calculated for rounds 2 and 3.
Round 1 started with 90 participants, with round 3 completed by 64 (71%). The seven highest ranking statements (≥ 5.0 mean score) were related to end-of-life care, decision making around forgoing and sustaining treatment, prevention of pain, education and competencies for pediatric intensive care nurses, reducing healthcare-associated infections, identifying appropriate nurse staffing levels, and implementing evidence into nursing practice. Nine research domains were prioritized, and these were as follows: 1) clinical nursing care practices, 2) pain and sedation, 3) quality and safety, 4) respiratory and mechanical ventilation, 5) child- and family-centered care, 6) ethics, 7) professional issues in nursing, 8) hemodynamcis and resuscitation, and 9) trauma and neurocritical care.
The results of this study inform the European Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care’s nursing research agenda in the future. The results allow nurse researchers within Europe to encourage collaborative initiatives for nursing research.
1PICU and Children’s Nursing Research Unit, Alder Hey Children’s NHS FT, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
2University of Central Lancashire, School of Health, Preston, United Kingdom.
3Intensive Care Neonatology, Wilhelmina Children’s Hospital, University Medical Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
4Intensive Care Neonatology, Emma Children’s Hospital, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
5School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Education and Society, Plymouth University, Plymouth, United Kingdom.
6School of Nursing and Midwifery, Faculty of Health Science, Curtin University, Perth, WA, Australia.
7Department of Pediatrics, Intensive Care Neonatology, Erasmus MC–Sophia Children’s Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
* See also p. 500.
This work was performed by the authors working at all the institutions cited above.
Supported, in part, by the European Society of Paediatric Intensive Care.
Presented, in part, at the European Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care Congress, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, June 12–15, 2013.
Dr. Tume received support for travel from the European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care (ESPNIC). Dr. Tume’s institution has pending grant support from the NIHR HS&DR. Dr. van den Hoogen received support for travel from the ESPNIC. Dr. Wielenga received support for travel from the ESPNIC and is employed by IC Neonatology, Emma Childrens Hospital/AMC. Dr. Latour received support for travel from the ESPNIC, the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies, and the European Federation of Critical Care Nursing Associations. Dr. Latour’s institution received grant support from Erasmus Medical Center (grant for a study on case manager by nurse practitioner in the NICU), Rotterdam University (RAAK PRO grant), and the ESPNIC (grant for PICTURE project).
For information regarding this article, E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org