A modified Delphi process to identify, rank and prioritize quality indicators for continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) care in critically ill patients

• Published in: Journal of critical care 2018-10, Vol.47, p.145-152
• Main Authors: Rewa, Oleksa G., Eurich, Dean T., Noel Gibney, R.T., Bagshaw, Sean M.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Clinical medicine; Continuous quality improvement; Critical care; Drug stores; Electronic health records; Family counseling; Health services research; Healthcare quality improvement; Nephrology; Patient safety; Performance measures; Pharmacists; Quality; Quality control; Renal replacement therapy; Systematic review
• ISSN: 0883-9441; 1557-8615
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2018.06.023

Continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) is a complex and life-sustaining therapy, reserved for our most acutely ill patients, and should be delivered in a safe, consistent and high-quality manner. However valid evidence-based quality indicators (QIs) for CRRT care are lacking. The objective of this study was to develop a prioritized list of QIs for CRRT care that may be used in any CRRT program. We conducted a modified three stage Delphi process. This consisted of two web-based rounds followed by an in-person meeting. We recruited an interdisciplinary panel of critical care nephrology experts and knowledge users. In each stage of the Delphi process panelists responded on whether a QI should be included in our final list. In the third round, any QI for which there was uncertainty to include was discussed and a final decision on whether to include was made. Forty-one panelists participated (18 from nephrology, 11 from intensive care, 7 educators, 2 decision-makers, 2 industry representatives and 1 pharmacist) from North America, Europe, Australasia and South America. Following the third Delphi round, 13 QIs for CRRT care were identified; 10 QIs were identified with a high level of agreement for face validity while 3 QIs were identified with a moderate level of agreement for face validity among panelists. We developed a prioritized list of 13 QIs for CRRT care. Future work should focus on developing validated benchmarks for these QIs and implementing them into CRRT programs. •We have identified 13 quality indicators (QIs) across the Donabedian Framework.•There existed wide variability in defining the parameters of the QIs.•Future work should focus on the implementation and evaluation of QIs into practice.