Roni Cole1,2, Jeanine Young1, Lauren Kearney1, John Md Thompson1,3. 1. School of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedicine, University of the Sunshine Coast, Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia. 2. Women's and Families Service Group, Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service, Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia. 3. Paediatrics, Child and Youth Health, School of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Abstract
AIM: To develop focused priorities to inform the revision of Australia's Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy (SUDI) risk reduction public health programme. METHODS: A content expert consensus research activity was designed using two consensus techniques. The two-phase study employed a Delphi process (phase 1) and a Nominal Group workshop technique (phase 2). The Delphi invited 56 national and international content experts. The Nominal Group comprised 17 Australasian experts and stakeholders to ensure priority setting was relevant to the Australian context. RESULTS: Phase 1 established a ranked thematic list of 10 key SUDI risk reduction themes. Phase 2 addressed three nominal questions producing prioritised lists for: key-message wording; contextual information and strategies to support caregiver implementation of key messages; and considerations in redesigning and dissemination of a safe sleep campaign. The top four priority themes were: sleep position, sleep space, smoking and surface-sharing. CONCLUSION: This two-phase priority setting was successful in establishing clearly defined infant safe sleep priorities. International content expert participation in phase 1 strengthened priority setting outcomes while phase 2 ensured final outcomes provided a strong national focus reflective of identified needs of Australian families. Findings provide a foundation from which important components can be considered when revising and developing future SUDI risk reduction programmes.
AIM: To develop focused priorities to inform the revision of Australia's Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy (SUDI) risk reduction public health programme. METHODS: A content expert consensus research activity was designed using two consensus techniques. The two-phase study employed a Delphi process (phase 1) and a Nominal Group workshop technique (phase 2). The Delphi invited 56 national and international content experts. The Nominal Group comprised 17 Australasian experts and stakeholders to ensure priority setting was relevant to the Australian context. RESULTS: Phase 1 established a ranked thematic list of 10 key SUDI risk reduction themes. Phase 2 addressed three nominal questions producing prioritised lists for: key-message wording; contextual information and strategies to support caregiver implementation of key messages; and considerations in redesigning and dissemination of a safe sleep campaign. The top four priority themes were: sleep position, sleep space, smoking and surface-sharing. CONCLUSION: This two-phase priority setting was successful in establishing clearly defined infant safe sleep priorities. International content expert participation in phase 1 strengthened priority setting outcomes while phase 2 ensured final outcomes provided a strong national focus reflective of identified needs of Australian families. Findings provide a foundation from which important components can be considered when revising and developing future SUDI risk reduction programmes.