Use of the nominal group technique to identify UK stakeholder views of the measures and domains used in the assessment of therapeutic exercise adherence for patients with musculoskeletal disorders

MALLETT, Ross, MCLEAN, Sionnadh, HOLDEN, Melanie A., POTIA, Tanzila, GEE, Melanie and HAYWOOD, Kirstie (2020). Use of the nominal group technique to identify UK stakeholder views of the measures and domains used in the assessment of therapeutic exercise adherence for patients with musculoskeletal disorders. BMJ Open, 10 (2), e031591.

Preview

PDF Mclean_Nominal_Group_Technique(VoR).pdf - Published Version Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. Download (280kB) | Preview

Abstract

Objectives: The objective was to the undertake nominal group technique (NGT) to evaluate current exercise adherence measures and isolated domains to develop stakeholder consensus on the domains to include in the measurement of therapeutic exercise adherence for patients with musculoskeletal disorders. Design: A 1-day NGT workshop was convened. Six exercise adherence measures were presented to the group that were identified in our recent systematic review. Discussions considered these measures and isolated domains of exercise adherence. Following discussions, consensus voting identified stakeholder agreement on the suitability of the six offered adherence measures and the inclusion of isolated domains of exercise adherence in future measurement. Setting: One stakeholder NGT workshop held in Sheffield, UK. Participants: Key stakeholders from the UK were invited to participate from four identified populations. 14 participants represented patients, clinicians, researchers and service managers. Results: All six exercise adherence measures were deemed not appropriate for use in clinical research or routine practice with no measure reaching 70% group agreement for suitability, relevance, acceptability or appropriateness. Three measures were deemed feasible to use in clinical practice. 25 constructs of exercise adherence did reach consensus threshold and were supported to be included as domains in the future measurement of exercise adherence. Conclusion: A mixed UK-based stakeholder group felt these six measures of exercise adherence were unacceptable. Differences in opinion within the stakeholder group highlighted the lack of consensus as to what should be measured, the type of assessment that is required and whose perspective should be sought when assessing exercise adherence. Previously unused domains may be needed alongside current ones, from both a clinician's and patient’s perspective, to gain understanding and to inform future measurement development. Further conceptualisation of exercise adherence is required from similar mixed stakeholder groups in various socioeconomic and cultural populations.

Item Type:	Article
Additional Information:	** Embargo end date: 18-02-2020 ** From BMJ via Jisc Publications Router ** Licence for this article starting on 18-02-2020: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ **Journal IDs: eissn 2044-6055 **Article IDs: publisher-id: bmjopen-2019-031591 **History: published_online 18-02-2020; published 02-2020; accepted 10-01-2020; rev-recd 22-11-2019; submitted 13-05-2019
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Rehabilitation medicine, 1506, 1727, musculoskeletal disorders, exercise, adherence, consensus, nominal group technique, measurement
Identification Number:	https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031591
Page Range:	e031591
SWORD Depositor:	Colin Knott
Depositing User:	Colin Knott
Date Deposited:	24 Feb 2020 10:55
Last Modified:	18 Mar 2021 02:35
URI:	https://shura.shu.ac.uk/id/eprint/25861

Actions (login required)

View Item

Downloads

Publication Metrics