BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), marked by acute hypoxemia and bilateral pulmonary infiltrates, has been defined in multiple ways since its first description. This Delphi study aims to collect global opinions on the conceptual framework of ARDS, assess the usefulness of components within current and past definitions and investigate the role of subphenotyping. The varied expertise of the panel will provide valuable insights for refining future ARDS definitions and improving clinical management.
METHODS: A diverse panel of 35-40 experts will be selected based on predefined criteria. Multiple choice questions (MCQs) or 7-point Likert-scale statements will be used in the iterative Delphi rounds to achieve consensus on key aspects related to the utility of definitions and subphenotyping. The Delphi rounds will be continued until a stable agreement or disagreement is achieved for all statements.
METHODS: Consensus will be considered as reached when a choice in MCQs or Likert-scale statement achieved ≥80% of votes for agreement or disagreement. The stability will be checked by non-parametric χ2 tests or Kruskal Wallis test starting from the second round of Delphi process. A p-value ≥0.05 will be used to define stability.
BACKGROUND: The study will be conducted in full concordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and will be reported according to CREDES guidance. This study has been granted an ethical approval waiver by the NMC Healthcare Regional Research Ethics Committee, Dubai (NMCHC/CR/DXB/REC/APP/002), owing to the nature of the research. Informed consent will be obtained from all panellists before the start of the Delphi process. The study will be published in a peer-review journal with the authorship agreed as per ICMJE requirements.
BACKGROUND: NCT06159465.

There is little consensus and high heterogeneity on the optimal set of relevant clinical outcomes in research studies regarding extubation in neurocritical care patients with brain injury undergoing mechanical ventilation. The aims of this study are to: (1) develop a core outcome set (COS) and (2) reach consensus on a hierarchical composite endpoint for such studies.
The study will include a broadly representative, international panel of stakeholders with research and clinical expertise in this field and will involve four stages: (1) a scoping review to generate an initial list of outcomes represented in the literature, (2) an investigator meeting to review the outcomes for inclusion in the Delphi surveys, (3) four rounds of online Delphi consensus-building surveys and (4) online consensus meetings to finalise the COS and hierarchical composite endpoint.
This study received ethical approval from the French Society of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine Institutional Review Board (SFAR CERAR-IRB 00010254-2023-029). The study results will be disseminated through communication to stakeholders, publication in a peer-reviewed journal, and presentations at conferences.
This study is registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) Initiative.

A clear development process and scientifically validated clinical practice competencies in standard critical care nursing (SCCN) have not yet been developed in Japan. Thus, this study aimed to develop a consensus-based set of SCCN competencies to provide a framework for critical care nursing education, training and evaluation.
Multistep, modified Delphi study (a systematic review, focus group interviews, a three-round web-based Delphi survey and an external validation process).
A systematic review of 23 studies, focus group interviews by 12 experts, a Delphi survey by 239 critical care experts (physicians, nurses and physical therapists) and an external validation by 5 experts (physicians and nurses).
A systematic review identified 685 unique competencies. The focus group interviews resulted in the addition of 3 performance indicator items, a synthesis of 2 subdomains and 10 elements. Of the 239 participants, 218 (91.2%), 209 (98.9%) and 201 (96.2%) responded in rounds 1, 2 and 3 of the Delphi survey, respectively. After round 3, 57 items were below the consensus level and were removed in the final round. External validation process feedback was received from experts after two revisions to ensure that the final competencies were valid, applicable, useful and clear. The final set of competencies was classified into 6 domains, 26 subdomains, 99 elements and 525 performance indicators.
This study found a set of SCCN competencies after a multistep, modified Delphi study. The results of this study are robust, and the competency framework can be used in multiple areas to improve clinical practice, including the assessment, training and certification of standard critical care nurses.

BACKGROUND: Most patients admitted to hospital recover with treatments that can be administered on the general ward. A small but important group deteriorate however and require augmented organ support in areas with increased nursing to patient ratios. In observational studies evaluating this cohort, proxy outcomes such as unplanned intensive care unit admission, cardiac arrest and death are used. These outcome measures introduce subjectivity and variability, which in turn hinders the development and accuracy of the increasing numbers of electronic medical record (EMR) linked digital tools designed to predict clinical deterioration. Here, we describe a protocol for developing a new outcome measure using mixed methods to address these limitations.
METHODS: We will undertake firstly, a systematic literature review to identify existing generic, syndrome-specific and organ-specific definitions for clinically deteriorated, hospitalised adult patients. Secondly, an international modified Delphi study to generate a short list of candidate definitions. Thirdly, a nominal group technique (NGT) (using a trained facilitator) will take a diverse group of stakeholders through a structured process to generate a consensus definition. The NGT process will be informed by the data generated from the first two stages. The definition(s) for the deteriorated ward patient will be readily extractable from the EMR.
BACKGROUND: This study has ethics approval (reference 16399) from the Central Adelaide Local Health Network Human Research Ethics Committee. Results generated from this study will be disseminated through publication and presentation at national and international scientific meetings.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a frequent complication after cardiac surgery with adverse short-term and long-term outcomes. Although prevention of AKI (PrevAKI) is strongly recommended, the optimal strategy is uncertain. The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guideline recommended a bundle of supportive measures in high-risk patients. In a single-centre trial, we recently demonstrated that the strict implementation of the KDIGO bundle significantly reduced the occurrence of AKI after cardiac surgery. In this feasibility study, we aim to evaluate whether the study protocol can be implemented in a multicentre setting in preparation for a large multicentre trial.
We plan to conduct a prospective, observational survey followed by a randomised controlled, multicentre, multinational clinical trial including 280 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. The purpose of the observational survey is to explore the adherence to the KDIGO recommendations in routine clinical practice. The second phase is a randomised controlled trial. The objective is to investigate whether the trial protocol is implementable in a large multicentre, multinational setting. The primary endpoint of the interventional part is the compliance rate with the protocol. Secondary endpoints include the occurrence of any AKI and moderate/severe AKI as defined by the KDIGO criteria within 72 hours after surgery, renal recovery at day 90, use of renal replacement therapy (RRT) and mortality at days 30, 60 and 90, the combined endpoint major adverse kidney events consisting of persistent renal dysfunction, RRT and mortality at day 90 and safety outcomes.
The PrevAKI multicentre study has been approved by the leading Research Ethics Committee of the University of Münster and the respective Research Ethics Committee at each participating site. The results will be used to design a large, definitive trial.
NCT03244514.