TY - JOUR
T1 - How to Advance Palliative Care Research in South America? Findings From a Delphi Study
AU - Collaborative Group for the Advancement of Research in Palliative Care in South America (Los PamPAS Group)
AU - Paiva, Carlos Eduardo
AU - Bonilla-Sierra, Patricia
AU - Tripodoro, Vilma Adriana
AU - Rodríguez-Nunez, Alfredo
AU - De Simone, Gustavo
AU - Rodriguez, Liliana Haydee
AU - de Oliveira Vidal, Edison Iglesias
AU - Ríos, Miriam Riveros
AU - Crispim, Douglas Henrique
AU - Pérez-Cruz, Pedro
AU - de Angelis Nascimento, Maria Salete
AU - Ospina, Paola Marcela Ruiz
AU - de Lima, Liliana
AU - Pastrana, Tania
AU - Zimmerman, Camilla
AU - Hui, David
AU - Bruera, Eduardo
AU - Paiva, Bianca Sakamoto Ribeiro
N1 - Funding Information:
CEP received funding from the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP grant no. 2018/09836-8 ). The authors had no conflict of interest to declare.
Funding Information:
CEP received funding from the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP grant no. 2018/09836-8). The authors had no conflict of interest to declare. The authors would like to acknowledge the participation of the following Palliative Care associations: Academia Nacional de Cuidados Paliativos (ANCP); Associación Latinoamericana de Cuidados Paliativos (ALCP); Sociedad Médica de Cuidados Paliativos de Chile; Asociación Cuidados Paliativos de Colombia (ASOCUPAC); Asociación Argentina de Medicina y Cuidados Paliativos (AAMyCP); Asociación Paraguaya de Medicina y Cuidados Paliativos (APMCP); and Instituto Pallium Latinoamerica. The authors would also like to thank Crislaine de Lima (MSc, PhD student) for her assistance during the conduct of this study.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors
PY - 2023/3
Y1 - 2023/3
N2 - Context: Progress in palliative care (PC) necessarily involves scientific development. However, research conducted in South America (SA) needs to be improved. Objectives: To develop a set of recommendations to advance PC research in SA. Methods: Eighteen international PC experts participated in a Delphi study. In round one, items were developed (open-ended questions); in round two, each expert scored the importance of each item (from 0 to 10); in round three, they selected the 20 most relevant items. Throughout the rounds, the five main priority themes for research in SA were defined. In Round three, consensus was defined as an agreement of ≥75%. Results: 60 potential suggestions for overcoming research barriers in PC were developed in round one. Also in Round one, 88.2% (15 of 17) of the experts agreed to define a priority research agenda. In Round two, the 36 most relevant suggestions were defined and a new one added. Potential research priorities were investigated (open-ended). In Round three, from the 37 items, 10 were considered the most important. Regarding research priorities, symptom control, PC in primary care, public policies, education and prognosis were defined as the most relevant. Conclusion: Potential strategies to improve scientific research on PC in SA were defined, including stimulating the formation of collaborative research networks, offering courses and workshops on research, structuring centers with infrastructure resources and trained researchers, and lobbying governmental organizations to convince about the importance of palliative care. In addition, priority research topics were identified in the region.
AB - Context: Progress in palliative care (PC) necessarily involves scientific development. However, research conducted in South America (SA) needs to be improved. Objectives: To develop a set of recommendations to advance PC research in SA. Methods: Eighteen international PC experts participated in a Delphi study. In round one, items were developed (open-ended questions); in round two, each expert scored the importance of each item (from 0 to 10); in round three, they selected the 20 most relevant items. Throughout the rounds, the five main priority themes for research in SA were defined. In Round three, consensus was defined as an agreement of ≥75%. Results: 60 potential suggestions for overcoming research barriers in PC were developed in round one. Also in Round one, 88.2% (15 of 17) of the experts agreed to define a priority research agenda. In Round two, the 36 most relevant suggestions were defined and a new one added. Potential research priorities were investigated (open-ended). In Round three, from the 37 items, 10 were considered the most important. Regarding research priorities, symptom control, PC in primary care, public policies, education and prognosis were defined as the most relevant. Conclusion: Potential strategies to improve scientific research on PC in SA were defined, including stimulating the formation of collaborative research networks, offering courses and workshops on research, structuring centers with infrastructure resources and trained researchers, and lobbying governmental organizations to convince about the importance of palliative care. In addition, priority research topics were identified in the region.
KW - Research
KW - South America
KW - barriers
KW - delphi method
KW - palliative care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85144479015&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85144479015&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2022.11.020
DO - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2022.11.020
M3 - Article
C2 - 36455800
AN - SCOPUS:85144479015
SN - 0885-3924
VL - 65
SP - 193
EP - 202
JO - Journal of pain and symptom management
JF - Journal of pain and symptom management
IS - 3
ER -