Search

BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have employed the Delphi technique to seek expert opinion about aspects of clinical practice. When researching literature on the Delphi technique, however, we discovered discrepancies in its application, and a lack of detail when reporting design, administration, and analysis methods. Such lack of specificity hinders the replicability and assessment of the clinical and cultural validity and reliability of Delphi studies. AIM: The aim of this paper is to detail the practical application of the Delphi technique as a culturally and clinically valid means of accessing expert opinion on the importance of clinical criteria. METHODS: Reference is made to a bicultural New Zealand mental health nursing clinical indicator study that employed a three-round reactive Delphi survey. Equal proportions of Maori and non-Maori nurses (n = 20) and consumers (n = 10) rated the importance of 91 clinical indicator statements for the achievement of professional practice standards. Additional statements (n = 21) suggested by Delphi participants in round 1 were included in subsequent rounds. In round 2, participants explained the rating they applied to statements that had not reached consensus in round 1, and summarized responses were provided to participants in round 3. Consensus was considered to have been achieved if 85% of round 3 ratings lay within a 2-point bracket on the 5-point Likert-scale overall, or in one of the Maori nurse, non-Maori nurse, or consumer groups. A mean rating of 4.5 after round 3 was set as the importance threshold. FINDINGS: Consensus occurred overall on 75 statements, and within groups on another 24. Most statements (n = 86) reached the importance benchmark. CONCLUSIONS: When rigorous methods of participant selection, group composition, participant feedback, and determination of consensus and importance are employed, the Delphi technique is a reliable, cost-effective means of obtaining and prioritizing experts judgements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focuses on the relationship between New Zealand and Australia. Formation of Te Ao Maramatanga, the New Zealand College of Mental Health Nurses; Assessment of mental health nursing in New Zealand; Constitutional heritage of New Zealand.

This paper describes the development and validation of bicultural clinical indicators that measure achievement of mental health nursing practice standards in New Zealand (ANZMCHN, 1995, Standards of practice for mental health nursing in New Zealand. ANZCMHN, Greenacres). A four-stage research design was utilised including focus groups, Delphi surveys, a pilot, and a national field study, with mental health nurses and consumers as participants. During the national field study, consumer files (n=327) from 11 District Health Boards, and registered nurses (n=422) completed an attitude questionnaire regarding the regularity of specific nursing and service activities. Results revealed a variation in the mean occurrence of the clinical indicators in consumer case notes of 18.5-89.9%. Five factors with good internal consistency, encompassing domains of mental health nursing required for best practice, were derived from analysis of the questionnaire. This study presents a research framework for developing culturally and clinically valid, reliable measures of clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]