Nature-based care opportunities and barriers in oncology contexts: a modified international e-Delphi survey

Abstract

ObjectiveTo develop recommendations regarding opportunities and barriers for nature-based care in oncology contexts using a structured knowledge generation process involving relevant healthcare and design experts.DesignFour-round modified electronic Delphi study. Oncology patients’ nature-based recommendations, uncovered in preceding qualitative investigation, were included in the first round for the expert participants’ consideration. Key items (opportunities and barriers) were developed using data aggregation and synthesis, followed by item prioritisation and 10-point Likert scale ranking (1=not important, 10=very important). Descriptive statistics were calculated to assess items of highest importance representing expert recommendations.ContextOnline Delphi process constituting an electronic international survey.ParticipantsA purposive sample of 200 potential panellists (recruitment target n=40) comprising healthcare practitioners, managers, designers, architects and researchers were invited to participate; experts were identified via research networks, snowballing and systematic literature review.Results38 experts across seven countries (Australia, USA, UK, New Zealand, Canada, Denmark and Sweden) returned questionnaire 1, which determined consent and acceptance for participation. Initial response rate was 19%, and subsequent response rates were 84%, 82% and 84% for rounds 2, 3 and 4, respectively. The Delphi panel developed recommendations consisting of 10 opportunities and 10 barriers. The following opportunities were rated to be of highest importance: window views from clinical areas onto nature; outdoor settings, gardens and courtyards with easy and effortless access; and nature-based physical exercise adapted to patient requirements. Highest-rated barriers for nature-based oncology care included lack of knowledge and awareness about benefits of nature engagement and inaccessibility, not considering access requirements for the very sick and frail.ConclusionsExperts suggested and agreed on a set of recommendations, which represent critical considerations for the safe adoption of nature-based oncology opportunities. These findings fill a gap in understanding about helpful nature-based oncology care and may translate into oncology design and innovation.

Definition and Prospective Assessment of Functional Recovery After Liver Transplantation: A New Objective Consensus‐Based Metric for Safe Discharge

“…After review of similar public health research studies, (14)(15)(16) we designed a mixed-method study consisting of 4 parts: 1. A systematic literature review and expert discussion to draft a first checklist of discharge criteria after LT. 2.…”

“…After review of similar public health research studies, ( 14‐16 ) we designed a mixed‐method study consisting of 4 parts: A systematic literature review and expert discussion to draft a first checklist of discharge criteria after LT. An exploratory online electronic Delphi (e‐Delphi) study with a restricted interdisciplinary panel of experts. A small‐scale study to test practical feasibility of the checklist. A final e‐Delphi study with an extended interdisciplinary panel of experts to validate the final checklist of criteria for functional recovery after LT. …”

“…A predefined, anonymous, Web‐based, 3‐phase sequence of questionnaire rounds with iterative feedback was scheduled. ( 15 ) Before beginning each round, the questionnaires were pilot‐tested on 2 LT surgeons from the Department of Surgery, Hôpital Pitié Salpêtrière, Paris, France. Changes in structure and word clarity were made in response to these LT surgeons’ feedback.…”

“…After review of similar public health research studies, (14)(15)(16) we designed a mixed-method study consisting of 4 parts:…”

“…The complete checklist (100% of 10 items) was fulfilled in 19 (42.2%) patients after median (IQR) 16.0 (8.0-21.0) days (functional recovery), with an observed LoS of 20.0 (9.0-24.0) days. A total of 25 (55.6%) patients were discharged after achieving 90% of the checklist items (9 out of 10) after 13 (5-19) days with an observed LoS of 15 (7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19) days.…”