TY - JOUR
T1 - Developing a National Trauma Research Action Plan
T2 - Results from the prehospital and mass casualty research Delphi survey
AU - Newgard, Craig D.
AU - Braverman, Maxwell A.
AU - Phuong, Jimmy
AU - Shipper, Edward S.
AU - Price, Michelle A.
AU - Bixby, Pamela J.
AU - Goralnick, Eric
AU - Daya, Mohamud R.
AU - Brooke Lerner, E.
AU - Guyette, Francis X.
AU - Rowell, Susan
AU - Doucet, Jay
AU - Jenkins, Peter
AU - Clay Mann, N.
AU - Staudenmayer, Kristan
AU - Blake, David P.
AU - Bulger, Eileen
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2022/2/1
Y1 - 2022/2/1
N2 - BACKGROUND: The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016 trauma system report recommended a National Trauma Research Action Plan to strengthen and guide future trauma research. To address this recommendation, 11 expert panels completed a Delphi survey process to create a comprehensive research agenda, spanning the continuum of trauma care.We describe the gap analysis and high-priority research questions generated from the National Trauma Research Action Plan panel on prehospital and mass casualty trauma care. METHODS: We recruited interdisciplinary national experts to identify gaps in the prehospital and mass casualty trauma evidence base and generate prioritized research questions using a consensus-driven Delphi survey approach. We included military and civilian representatives. Panelists were encouraged to use the Patient/Population, Intervention, Compare/Control, and Outcome format to generate research questions. We conducted four Delphi rounds in which participants generated key research questions and then prioritized the questions on a 9-point Likert scale to low-, medium-, and high-priority items. We defined consensus as ≥60% agreement on the priority category and coded research questions using a taxonomy of 118 research concepts in 9 categories. RESULTS: Thirty-one interdisciplinary subject matter experts generated 490 research questions, of which 433 (88%) reached consensus on priority. The rankings of the 433 questions were as follows: 81 (19%) high priority, 339 (78%) medium priority, and 13 (3%) low priority. Among the 81 high-priority questions, there were 46 taxonomy concepts, including health systems of care (36 questions), interventional clinical trials and comparative effectiveness (32 questions), mortality as an outcome (30 questions), prehospital time/transport mode/level of responder (24 questions), system benchmarks (17 questions), and fluid/blood product resuscitation (17 questions). CONCLUSION: This Delphi gap analysis of prehospital and mass casualty care identified 81 high-priority research questions to guide investigators and funding agencies for future trauma research.
AB - BACKGROUND: The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016 trauma system report recommended a National Trauma Research Action Plan to strengthen and guide future trauma research. To address this recommendation, 11 expert panels completed a Delphi survey process to create a comprehensive research agenda, spanning the continuum of trauma care.We describe the gap analysis and high-priority research questions generated from the National Trauma Research Action Plan panel on prehospital and mass casualty trauma care. METHODS: We recruited interdisciplinary national experts to identify gaps in the prehospital and mass casualty trauma evidence base and generate prioritized research questions using a consensus-driven Delphi survey approach. We included military and civilian representatives. Panelists were encouraged to use the Patient/Population, Intervention, Compare/Control, and Outcome format to generate research questions. We conducted four Delphi rounds in which participants generated key research questions and then prioritized the questions on a 9-point Likert scale to low-, medium-, and high-priority items. We defined consensus as ≥60% agreement on the priority category and coded research questions using a taxonomy of 118 research concepts in 9 categories. RESULTS: Thirty-one interdisciplinary subject matter experts generated 490 research questions, of which 433 (88%) reached consensus on priority. The rankings of the 433 questions were as follows: 81 (19%) high priority, 339 (78%) medium priority, and 13 (3%) low priority. Among the 81 high-priority questions, there were 46 taxonomy concepts, including health systems of care (36 questions), interventional clinical trials and comparative effectiveness (32 questions), mortality as an outcome (30 questions), prehospital time/transport mode/level of responder (24 questions), system benchmarks (17 questions), and fluid/blood product resuscitation (17 questions). CONCLUSION: This Delphi gap analysis of prehospital and mass casualty care identified 81 high-priority research questions to guide investigators and funding agencies for future trauma research.
KW - Delphi
KW - Mass casualty
KW - Prehospital
KW - Trauma
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85123879006&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85123879006&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/TA.0000000000003469
DO - 10.1097/TA.0000000000003469
M3 - Article
C2 - 34789701
AN - SCOPUS:85123879006
SN - 2163-0755
VL - 92
SP - 398
EP - 406
JO - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
JF - Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery
IS - 2
ER -