Using Expert Consensus to Develop a Tool to Assess Physical Therapists’ Knowledge, Skills, and Judgement in Performing Airway Suctioning
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to develop a tool to assess physical therapists’ knowledge, skills, and judgement in performing airway suctioning with intubated and non-intubated adults. Method: A modified Delphi methodology was used to develop the tool and to evaluate its sensibility (i.e., common-sense nature). Participants were experienced cardiorespiratory physical therapists who perform airway suctioning and physical therapists employed in academic positions related to cardiorespiratory physical therapy at Canadian universities. Round 1 focused on refining which items to include in the tool, Round 2 focused on finalizing the items, and Round 3 focused on evaluating a preliminary version of the tool. Results: A total of 34 individuals participated in Round 1, 30 participated in Round 2, and 25 participated in Round 3. A literature review identified 11 relevant domains and 69 supporting competencies. In Round 1, consensus was achieved for all domains; however, it was borderline for the professionalism domain. Multiple participants suggested that it was redundant because it is a global requirement for all physical therapists. Consensus was also achieved for 64 of the 69 supporting competencies; however, it was borderline for 5 of these items, and 5 achieved no consensus. In Round 2, participants rated a series of recommendations related to items requiring further consideration, as well as 9 new items suggested by the participants in Round 1. In Round 3, the preliminary tool was found to be globally sensible, but concerns were expressed about the inclusion of redundant factors and the tool’s length. The tool was revised, resulting in a tool with 4 domains, 6 sub-domains and 43 supporting competencies, as well as an item rating the individual’s overall performance. Conclusions: The final-round sensibility questionnaire provided preliminary evidence of the tool’s face and content validity. We will investigate the tool’s measurement properties in a future study.
