The National Institute for Health Research Critical Care Research Priority Setting Survey 2018.

Intensive care critical care medicine research priorities

Journal

Journal of the Intensive Care Society
ISSN: 1751-1437
Titre abrégé: J Intensive Care Soc
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101538668

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Aug 2020
Historique:
entrez: 13 8 2020
pubmed: 13 8 2020
medline: 13 8 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Defining research priorities in intensive care is key to determining appropriate allocation of funding. Several topics were identified from the 2014 James Lind Alliance priority setting exercise conducted with the Intensive Care Society. The James Lind Alliance process included significant (and vital) patient/public contribution, but excluded professionals without a bedside role. As a result it may have failed to identify potential early-stage translational research topics, which are more likely identified by medical and/or academic members of relevant specialist basic science groups. The objective of the present project was to complement the James Lind Alliance project by generating an updated list of research priorities by facilitating academic research input. A survey was conducted by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) to identify the key research priorities from intensive care clinicians, including allied health professionals and academics, along with any evolving themes arising from translational research. Feasibility of all identified topics were then discussed and allocated to themes by a joint clinical academics/NIHR focus group. The survey was completed by 94 intensive care clinicians (including subspecialists), academics and allied health professions. In total, 203 research questions were identified, with the top five themes focusing on: appropriate case selection (e.g. who and when to treat; 24%), ventilation (7%), sepsis (6%), delirium (5%) and rehabilitation (5%). Utilising a methodology distinct from that employed by the James Lind Alliance process, from a broad spectrum of intensive care clinicians/scientists, enabled identification of a variety of priority research areas. These topics can now inform not only the investigator-led research agenda, but will also be considered in due course by the NIHR for potential future funding calls.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32782458
doi: 10.1177/1751143719862244
pii: 10.1177_1751143719862244
pmc: PMC7401440
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

198-201

Informations de copyright

© The Intensive Care Society 2019.

Références

BMJ Open. 2015 Dec 16;5(12):e010006
pubmed: 26674506
J Intensive Care Soc. 2016 May;17(2):111-116
pubmed: 28979474

Auteurs

Kate C Tatham (KC)

Section of Anaesthetics, Pain Medicine and Intensive Care, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College, London, UK.
Critical Care & Anaesthetics, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.

Daniel F McAuley (DF)

School of Medicine, Dentistry and Biomedical Sciences, Centre for Experimental Medicine, Institute for Health Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland.
Regional Intensive Care Unit, Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast, UK.

Mark Borthwick (M)

Critical Care, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.

Neil G Henderson (NG)

National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre (NETSCC), University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Gemma Bashevoy (G)

National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre (NETSCC), University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Stephen J Brett (SJ)

Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Intensive Care Medicine, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, The Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK.

Classifications MeSH