• J Pain Symptom Manage · Feb 2020

    Chronic breathlessness explanations and research priorities: Findings from an international Delphi survey.

    • Marie T Williams, Hayley Lewthwaite, Dina Brooks, Dennis Jensen, Sara J Abdallah, and Kylie N Johnston.
    • Innovation, Implementation And Clinical Translation in Health (IIMPACT), School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. Electronic address: marie.williams@unisa.edu.au.
    • J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020 Feb 1; 59 (2): 310-319.e12.

    ContextExplanations provided by health professionals may underpin helpful or harmful symptom beliefs and expectations of people living with chronic breathlessness.ObjectivesThis study sought perspectives from health professionals with clinical/research expertise in chronic breathlessness on priority issues in chronic breathlessness explanations and research.MethodsAuthors (n = 74) of publications specific to chronic breathlessness were invited to a three-round Delphi survey. Responses to open-ended questions (Round 1 "What is important to: include/avoid when explaining chronic breathlessness; prioritize in research?") were transformed to Likert scale (1-9) items for rating in subsequent rounds. A priori consensus was defined as ≥70% of respondents rating an item as important (Likert rating 7-9) and interquartile range ≤2.ResultsOf the 31 Round 1 respondents (nine countries, five professional disciplines), 24 (77%) completed Rounds 2 and 3. Sixty-three items met consensus (include n = 28; avoid n = 9; research n = 26). Explanations of chronic breathlessness should use patient-centered communication; acknowledge the distress, variability, and importance of this sensation; emphasize current management principles; clarify maladaptive beliefs and expectations; and avoid moral culpability and inappropriate reassurance. Research priorities included the need 1) for a comprehensive understanding of breathlessness science; 2) to optimize, explore, and develop effective interventions, both pharmacological and nonpharmacological; and 3) determine effective models of care including strategies for education and training of health professionals and people caring for, or living with, chronic breathlessness.ConclusionThese consensus-based concepts for chronic breathlessness explanations and research provide a starting point for conversations between patients, carers, clinicians, and researchers within the chronic breathlessness community.Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…