How should interventions to treat hand oedema be delivered? An online Delphi Consensus Method

Miller, Leanne K., Jerosch-Herold, Christina ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0525-1282 and Shepstone, Lee (2022) How should interventions to treat hand oedema be delivered? An online Delphi Consensus Method. Hand Therapy, 27 (2). pp. 58-66. ISSN 1758-9983

[thumbnail of final_accepted_version]
Preview
PDF (final_accepted_version) - Accepted Version
Download (285kB) | Preview

Abstract

Introduction: Hand oedema (swelling) is a common consequence of hand trauma or surgery, but there is little agreement on how interventions to treat hand oedema should be delivered in practice. The purpose of this study was to engage a group of self-identified hand therapy experts to develop consensus on how four commonly used oedema management treatments should be implemented, which could be used in clinical practice or future clinical trials. Method: A web-based Delphi study was conducted with eight volunteer hand therapists who met the pre-defined eligibility criteria for an ‘expert’ and were members of the British Association of Hand Therapists (BAHT). An a priori level of agreement was set at 75%. Interventions requiring consensus were decided on as a result of a previous national survey of practice and consisted of compression, elevation, massage and kinesiology tape. Results: A total of 25 items were discussed across 3 rounds. This ranged from 23 items in round 1, to three items in round 3. In round 1, consensus was reached on 7/23 (30%) items. The required 75% consensus was reached on 14 items in round 2 and 1/3 items achieved consensus in round 3. Massage was the only treatment that required a third round. Discussion: Consensus was reached on intervention description for three of the four modalities including the materials used (what), method of application including duration and frequency (when and how much) and tailoring or modifications. Two questions relating to massage did not reach the required consensus threshold and a majority agreement was accepted. The small panel size is a limitation and may affect the credibility of the consensus reached.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: Funding: LM was funded by a National Institute for Health Research and Health Education England Clinical Doctoral Research Fellowship (CDRF-2014-05-064). This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and Health Education England.
Faculty \ School: Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > School of Health Sciences
Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > Norwich Medical School
Depositing User: LivePure Connector
Date Deposited: 21 Apr 2022 15:30
Last Modified: 23 Oct 2022 03:43
URI: https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/84715
DOI: 10.1177/17589983221090280

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item