Objectives The main study aim was to examine the applicability of a novel method to assess the criterion of values and preferences within the Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation evidence to decision framework. The group concept mapping (GCM) approach was applied to identify, organise and prioritise values and preferences in the example of health professionals’ choice of analgesia for patients with acute trauma pain.
Setting Prehospital and emergency care centres in the Nordic countries of Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Iceland.
Participants Acute care health professionals with qualifications to administer analgesic agents to patients in emergency and prehospital settings, including advanced ambulance assistants, rescue officers, paramedics, emergency physicians and emergency nurses, participated in an online survey in which statements were generated (n=40) and structured (n=11) and finally analysed and interpreted in a validation meeting (n=4).
Results Using GCM, ideas were generated and structured through online participation. Results were interpreted at a validation meeting. In total, 111 unique ideas were identified and organised into seven clusters: drug profile, administration, context, health professionals’ preferences and logistics, safety profile, patient’s medical history and acute clinical situation.
Conclusions Based on GCM, a conceptual model was developed, and values and preferences around choice of analgesia in emergency care were revealed. Health professionals within acute care can apply the conceptual model to support their decision-making when choosing the best available treatment for pain for their patients in emergency care.
- group concept mapping
- acute pain
- conceptual model
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
KTN and MUR are co-first authors.
Contributors RC, LK and MUR generated the idea for this study, and KTN, MUR and EEW designed the study, acquired the data and participated in the interpretation of the data together with AFO. KTN and EEW performed the concept analysis. KTN, MUR, RC and EEW drafted the manuscript, while LK and AFO critically revised it for important intellectual content. All authors approved the final manuscript.
Funding This study was supported by an unrestricted grant from Mundipharma and by the Oak Foundation (OCAY-13-309). Research and Development representatives from Mundipharma have been invited to comment on the protocol (before contacting any external stakeholders and before collection of any data), on aspects such as clarity and potential outcomes, and so on. However, the process of collecting data and writing of the manuscript was done completely without interaction from Mundipharma.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Data availability statement All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. All statements on which the analysis is based are displayed in a supplementary file.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.