e-Delphi Technique Research Articles

Advantages and Limitations of the e-Delphi Technique

In the last 30 years, the application of the Delphi technique has been increasing. With the recent availability and established popularity of Internet-based research tools, the Internet has been identified as a means for mitigating Delphi limitations, maximizing its advantages, and expanding the breadth of its application. The discourse on the application of “e-Delphi” has been speculative in nature, however, with pragmatic analysis of Internet-based Delphi administration being limited in scope. Concomitantly, methodological guidance for conducting the e-Delphi in health education is limited, with best-practice implementation strategies yet to emerge. This paper advances the understanding of the e-Delphi technique, contributes to the evolution of this Internet-based research methodology, and provides guidance for the e-Delphi researcher in health education. Further, it offers a contribution to the discourse about Internet-based inquiry generally, and on using the e-Delphi technique in health education specifically. The authors illustrate that e-Delphi has a range of benefits that are effective and efficient in assuaging traditional Delphi limitations; nevertheless, a set of methodological issues remain unaddressed and make apparent the need for future research investments to better understand and alleviate challenges presented for e-Delphi research in health education.

An international eDelphi study identifying the research and education priorities in wound management and tissue repair

To incorporate an international and multidisciplinary consensus in the determination of the research and education priorities for wound healing and tissue repair. A compelling reason for the study is the lack of an agreed list of priorities for wound care research and education. Furthermore, there is a growth in the prevalence of chronic wounds, a growth in wound care products and marketing, and an increase in clinician attendance at conferences and education programmes. The study used a survey method. A four-round eDelphi technique was used to collect responses from an international population of health professionals across 24 countries. Responses were obtained from 360 professionals representing many health care settings. The top education priorities related to the standardisation of all foundation education programmes in wound care, the inclusion of wound care in all professional undergraduate and postgraduate education programmes, selecting dressings and the prevention of pressure ulcers. The top research priorities related to the dressing selection, pressure ulcer prevention and wound infection. conclusion: Professionals from different backgrounds and countries who are engaged in wound management share a common set of priorities for research and education. Most notably, the priorities identified relate to long-established clinical challenges in wound care and underpin the principles of good patient care practices. The priorities are closely allied to an ageing population and identify many challenges ahead for practitioners engaged in wound management services. The provision of wound care is a major investment of health service resources and remains a clinical challenge today. Research is essential to building evidence-based practice and fundamental to development of quality in standards of practice; education is central to achieving competence to deliver effective care. The determination of research and education priorities is therefore an absolute requirement in developing services.