Development of standardised programme content for phase II cardiac rehabilitation programmes in Australia using a modified Delphi process

Abstract

ObjectiveTo develop standardised programme content for Australian phase II cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programme.DesignUsing the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method (RAM), a two-phase process including a comprehensive literature review and a two round modified Delphi process was undertaken to develop and validate content of a standardised CR programmes.ParticipantsAn invited multidisciplinary expert advisory group (EAG; n=16), including CR health professionals (nurses, allied health professionals, cardiologist), academics, policy makers, representation from the Australian Cardiovascular Health and Rehabilitation Association and consumers, provided oversight of the literature review and assisted with development of best practice statements. Twelve members of the EAG went onto participate in the modified Delphi process rating the necessity of statements in two rounds on a scale of 1 (not necessary) to 9 (essential).Main outcome measureBest practice statements that achieved a median score of ≥8 on a nine-point scale were categorised as ‘essential’; statements that achieved a median score of ≥6 were categorised as ‘desirable’ and statements with a median score of <6 were omitted.Results49 best practice statements were developed from the literature across ten areas of care within four module domains (CR foundations, developing heart health knowledge, psychosocial health and life beyond CR). At the end of a two-round validation process a total of 47 best practice statements were finalised; 29 statements were rated as essential, 18 as desirable and 2 statements were omitted.ConclusionsFor the first time in Australia, an evidence-based and consensus-led standardised programme content for phase II CR has been developed that can be provided to CR coordinators.

Development of a counseling intervention protocol to improve treatment adherence of ischemic heart disease patients

“…The Delphi technique has been used extensively in developing concepts and protocols in cardiac rehabilitation and have gained good outcomes. [26][27][28] The present study also received good consensus results from the two rounds of Delphi review. The lengthy time duration in reviewing the protocol during the two rounds of the Delphi review is been a limitation of the protocol development.…”

Hybrid cardiac telerehabilitation for coronary artery disease in Australia: a cost-effectiveness analysis

“…Thirdly, the diversity of both programs and participants across the Australian cardiac rehabilitation landscape must be acknowledged. While a standardised content outline for cardiac rehabilitation programs has been developed, there are currently no criteria for what constitutes a face-to-face program in Australia [ 53 ], and much heterogeneity exists. While we modelled an “average face-to-face program”, this is not representative of all cardiac rehabilitation services delivered and may limit generalisability of the findings across different approaches to in-person delivery.…”

Telehealth is here to stay but not without challenges: a consultation of cardiac rehabilitation clinicians during COVID-19 in Victoria, Australia

“…This is particularly relevant for CR in Australia where there is a lack of programme standardization. While there is now recommended standardized programme content, 36 which was written to be delivery agnostic, this is not yet mandatory nor audited. However, it is recognized that CR programmes do need to be flexible to serve the many different patient populations across a large and diverse country such as Australia.…”