Skip to main content
African Journal of Thoracic and Critical Care Medicine logoLink to African Journal of Thoracic and Critical Care Medicine
. 2021 Oct 4;27(3):10.7196/AJTCCM.2021.v27i3.137. doi: 10.7196/AJTCCM.2021.v27i3.137

Expert consensus on the minimum clinical standards of practice for Nigerian physiotherapists working in intensive care units: A modified Delphi study

I Idris 1, A W Awotidebe 2, N B Mukhtar 2, R N Ativie 3, J M Nuhu 2, I C Muhammad 4, A S Danbatta 5, R A Adedoyin 6, J Mohammed 2
PMCID: PMC8573816  PMID: 34761211

Abstract

Background

Management of patients in intensive care units (ICUs) needs staff with a recommended level of expertise and experience owing to the life-threatening nature of illnesses, injuries and complications that these patients present with. There are no specific guidelines governing physiotherapy practice in ICUs in Nigeria. Hence, there is a need to have expert consensus on the minimum clinical standard of practice for physiotherapists working in ICUs as a first step to proposing/developing guidelines in the future.

Objectives

To assess the expert consensus on the minimum clinical standard of practice for physiotherapists working in ICUs in Nigeria.

Methods

Physiotherapists with working experience in Nigerian ICUs were purposively recruited into the present study using a modified Delphi technique. A questionnaire comprising 222 question items on the role of physiotherapy in critical care was adopted and administered to the participants over three rounds of Delphi procedure (online). Participants checked either ‘essential’, ‘not essential’ or ‘unsure’ for each question item. For each question item to be considered ‘essential’ or ‘not essential’, a consensus agreement ≥70% had to be met. Questions without consensus were further modified by providing definition or clarification and presented in subsequent rounds. Data were analysed descriptively.

Results

We recruited 26 expert physiotherapists who consented to the study and completed the first round of the study. The majority of the physiotherapists (n=24) remained in the study after the third round. A total of 178 question items were adjudged to be ‘essential’ after the first round, and a further 15 and three additional items were subsequently adjudged to be as ‘essential’ after modifying the outstanding question items during the second and third rounds, respectively. No consensus was reached for 24 items. None of the question items were ranked as ‘not essential’ after all the rounds.

Conclusion

Expert consensus was achieved for a substantial number of question items regarding knowledge and skills for assessment, condition and treatment items of the questionnaire by experienced critical care physiotherapists in Nigeria.

Keywords: expert consensus, critical care physiotherapy, Delphi technique, standards of practice

Background

Intensive care units (ICUs) are specially staffed and equipped hospital wards for management of patients with life-threatening illnesses, injuries or complications. However, the range to which different hospitals provide services to critically ill patients depends on the skills, expertise, facilities and clinical specialties available in the hospitals.[1] Physiotherapy is one of the fundamental interventions administered to patients in ICU.[2] The major goals of physiotherapy in the ICU include maintaining/restoring the general patient’s functional capacity, and restoring respiratory and physical independence. Physiotherapy also helps to decrease the risks associated with stay in the ICU such as acquired muscle weakness, physical deconditioning and poor quality of life.[3] Moreover, the positive impact of physiotherapy in the management of patients whose conditions require critical care is well documented[4,5] and noted to improve survival rates.[6] There is moderate-to-strong evidence to support the role of physiotherapy for managing critically ill patients.[7]

The ICUs in resource-restricted settings have limited infrastructure, materials and human resources.[8] In the UK, just as in other developed countries, physiotherapy is provided for 24 hours/day and 7 days a week (including on-call and public holidays) for patients in the ICUs.[7] In Nigeria, ICU patients are managed by physiotherapists every day of the week, but no evidence exists to support whether this is actually instituted in the ICUs standard of practice or guidelines. Consequently, some fresh graduate physiotherapists may start their first on-call service with less or no previous hands-on experience or training in managing critically ill patients in some ICUs.[9] Some centres compensate for this inadequacy by organising in-house/local critical care programmes/ICU workshops or mentoring to solve the problems of novice physiotherapists working in the ICU. Nevertheless, a bachelor’s degree remains the least requirement for physiotherapists to work in ICUs in Nigeria. In short, the quality of care provided in the ICU largely depends on the skills of the attending physiotherapist.

Previous modified Delphi studies by Skinner et al.[10] in Australia, Twose et al.[11] in the UK and Takahashi et al [12] in Japan identified 132, 107 and 199, respectively, question items that are considered ‘essential’ for physiotherapists working in critical care units, and form a 222-item questionnaire developed by Skinner et al.[10] A similar study using the same questionnaire is necessary in Nigeria to identify and possibly suggest ways to standardise the competencies of physiotherapy practice in ICUs. As no standards of practice currently exist for the training of physiotherapists working in critical care in Nigeria and adopting an existing questionnaire has precedence in Delphi methodology.[13] Using the questionnaire developed by Skinner et al. [10] offered us the opportunity to contextualise our findings using a global point of view. Moreover, ICU patients require the best care possible, irrespective of the setting. The absence of national treatment guidelines indicates that most ICU interventions in resource-limited settings are often based upon treatment guidelines adopted from developed countries or international stakeholders.

The development of critical care in resource-poor settings relies on service improvements, including leveraging human resources through training, a focus on sustainable technology, continuous analyses of cost effectiveness and sharing of context-specific best practices.[14] Therefore, the present study is designed to explore the consensus of experienced physiotherapists regarding the minimum clinical standards of practice that physiotherapists working in critical care in our environment should possess. Moreover, the findings from this study could help in focusing future treatment guidelines, postgraduate education and ICU-related training of critical care physiotherapists in Nigeria and other similar countries.

Method

The present study followed a guide for Conducting and REporting of DElphi Studies (CREDES).[15]

Ethics

Ethical approval was sought and obtained from the Research and Ethical Committee of the College of Health Sciences, Bayero University, Kano (ref. no. NHREC/06/12/19/22). The ethical protocols of the Declaration of Helsinki including the ethical principles of informed consent, privacy and confidentiality of data provided were followed in the Delphi rounds.

Design

A modified Delphi technique was used to seek consensus on the minimum standards of practice for physiotherapists working in ICUs in Nigeria. Delphi techniques using online surveys are easily accessible and were the most appropriate for this study because they allow participants from across Nigeria to take part in the study from start to finish.[16,17] In addition, the Delphi technique allows for formation of consensus or exploration of a field beyond existing knowledge. It can be adapted to the particular requirements of the research question, and it takes the form of open and exploratory questions to standardised confirmatory approaches.[15] In the present study, the basic Delphi technique was modified to allow for question clarification, addition of new items and eventual agreement of the items by participants. Furthermore, in the second and third rounds of the Delphi study, additional definitions with examples (where possible) were provided for some terminologies where consensus was not reached in the first round to further enhance understanding of the terms.

Respondents

The prospective participants for this study were recruited using purposive sampling, alongside a snowballing method via advertisement through the official communication channels of the physiotherapy practice regulatory board and professional associations in Nigeria: namely (i) Medical Rehabilitation Therapist Registration Board of Nigeria (MRTB); (ii) Nigeria Society of Physiotherapy; and (iii) Association of Clinical and Academic Physiotherapists of Nigeria. Participants’ recruitment was also made via social media platforms, particularly WhatsApp and Facebook groups of professional associations (e.g. Nigerian physiotherapists). Eligibility criteria were only communicated to participants after they had accepted an invitation to participate in the present study.

Sample size was not fixed so that we would be able to recruit as many participants as possible who met the eligibility criteria. The eligibility criteria for participation included the following: (i) physiotherapists with a minimum of 5 years’ working experience, three of which must be in a senior role within the critical care setting; (ii) physiotherapists involved in the supervision or teaching of physiotherapy staff working on-call or completing emergency duty; and (iii) academic physiotherapy staff involved in the provision of entry-level cardio-respiratory physiotherapy with at least two articles published in the area of critical care.

Questionnaire

The questionnaire utilised in the present study was adopted from Skinner et al.[10] The questionnaire was structured and planned content-wise to be as extensive as possible across the physiotherapy role in critical care.[10] We did not pilot the questionnaire because it had been previously used in multiple studies [11] and we also aimed to contextualise the opinions of experienced physiotherapists in comparison with those in previous studies. Twose et al.[11] also adopted and used the same questionnaire without piloting. The questionnaire further highlighted that the motive of the present study was to determine the minimum standard of clinical practice that should be expected from physiotherapists to qualify them to work autonomously and safely with patients in critical care settings. The questionnaire consisted of 222 question items. For each question item, participants were asked to either check ‘essential’, ‘not essential’, or ‘unsure’ option. Respondents were also asked to submit additional items that were not previously included if they thought it necessary and essential for inclusion in the first round.

Procedure

Three rounds of questionnaire administration were sent to the study participants between 10 August 2020 and 2 October 2020, with each round lasting an average of 2 weeks. Delbecq et al.[18] recommended that 2 weeks is enough for Delphi participants to attempt each round. The study questionnaires were administered using Google forms via WhatsApp or email. The participants’ information sheets were included in the invitation message. Reminders (phone calls, SMS and WhatsApp messages) were also sent to non-responders 7 days and a day before the deadline. Participants were also assured of the anonymity of all information provided so that they would not be afraid to admit their knowledge or lack of knowledge on any question item. Moreover, the participants were not asked to provide their names or any identifiers that might link them to any information provided. Demographic variables were only collected during round one, and were analysed separately by a blinded author (ASD). On completion of each round, participants were sent a personalised message thanking them and requesting for their co-operation in the subsequent rounds.

Data analysis

Data were analysed using descriptive statistics. Since demographic data were collected in the first round only, the data were summarised as a mean with standard deviation (SD), frequencies and percentages using Microsoft Excel. For each question item, a consensus to determine if such a question item was either ‘essential’ or ‘not essential’ was based on a consensus agreement of ≥70%. A study by the original developers of the instrument recommended a threshold of 70%.[10] Therefore, this threshold was used in the present study to allow for comparison of the study findings later. The percentage of ‘unsure’ responses was also taken into consideration to determine whether consensus was reached. Specifically, consensus for each item was calculated by subtracting the number of ‘unsure’ responses from the percentage of ‘essential’ responses. For example, if an item ranked 74% as ‘essential’ and the percentage of ‘unsure’ responses was 9%, then the percentage of ‘unsure’ responses was removed from that of ‘essential’. For any item to be considered as ‘essential’ or ‘not essential’, consensus had to be >70% in any of the three rounds.

Results

A panel of 47 experts (experienced physiotherapists working in Nigerian ICUs) responded to our invitation to participate in the Delphi study, and 32 potential participants met the inclusion criteria and were invited to participate in the first round of the present study. However, 81.3% (n=26) of the participants completed the consent forms and participated in the first round of the present study. Three-quarters of the participants (75%; n=24) remained by the end of the third round (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Flowchart of the recruitment and Delphi process.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Flow of items through the three rounds of the Delphi process.

The participants comprised physiotherapy clinicians (n=24) and academics (n=2). The participants were drawn from all the six geopolitical regions of Nigeria (North East (n=4), North Central (n=5), North West (n=9), South East (n=4), South-South (n=1) and South West (n=3)). The majority of the participants (61.5%) had 10 years’ or more ICU work-related experience. A substantial number of them (n=19) were staff of federal tertiary hospitals (Table 1).

Table 1. Demographics of the experts that participated in the Delphi study (n=26).

Characteristics Participants, n (%)*
Age (years), mean (SD) 40.8 (8.6)
Gender
  Male 16 (61.5)
  Female 10 (38.5)
Institution of practice
  University hospitals 18 (69.2)
  University academics 2 (7.7)
  Medical centre 1 (3.8)
  Specialist hospitals 3 (11.6)
  Private hospitals 2 (7.7)
Years of experience in ICU
  5 - 10 10 (38.5)
  10 - 15 5 (19.2)
  15 - 20 6 (23.1)
  >20 5 (19.2)
Published article
  <2 17 (85.0)
  2 - 6 3 (15.0)

ICU = intensive care unit

SD = standard deviation

*Unless otherwise specified

The first round of the study consisted of 222 items, of which 178 were considered as ‘essential’ by the respondents. One additional item was suggested by one participant; however, it was not added in the second round because it was a duplicate of an existing question item. None of the question items qualified to be ranked as ‘not essential’ in the first round, and consensus was not reached on 17 items on account of ‘unsure’ responses. In the end, the remaining 44 items were presented again in the second round.

Following the second round, 17 additional items were ranked as ‘essential’ and consensus was reached for 27 items. Still, no item was ranked as ‘not essential’, and no additional item was suggested by the participants in the second round. The remaining 27 question items were further presented in the third round. Consensus was only reached for 3 question items that were categorised as ‘essential’. Consequently, consensus was not reached for the remaining 24 items. Just like in rounds 1 and 2, no question item was ranked as ‘not essential’ in the third round.

Overall, the participants reached consensus on 197 items as ‘essential’ after three rounds. While no items were considered ‘not essential’, no consensus was reached for 24 items. Detailed breakdown of the question items that reached consensus following the Delphi rounds are presented in Tables 2, 3 and 4. The question items that did not reach consensus after the third round are presented in Table 5.

Table 2. Assessment items determined as essentials (consensus >70% ‘essential’).

Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can accurately interpret readings from clinical monitoring including:
  Body temperature 100
  Heart rate 100
  Blood pressure 100
  Basic ECGs, SpO2/pulse oximetry 100
  End tidal carbon dioxide 96.2
  Fluid intake and output 100
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can understand equipment (including recognition of equipment) and understand the implications for physiotherapy of:
  Oxygen therapy devices 100
  Endotracheal tubes and tracheostomy 92.3
  Central venous catheters 88.5
  Arterial lines 96.2
  Venous blood gas interpretation (including SvO2)
Vascath/haemodialysis catheter/continuous veno-venous.
61.5 88
  Intercostal catheters 84.6
  Wound drains 80.8
  Indwelling urinary catheter 100
  Nasogastric tubes 100
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can accurately interpret findings from laboratory investigations including:
  Haemoglobin 100
  Platelets, APTT, INR 92.3
  White cell count 88.5
  Blood glucose levels 100
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist is aware of the actions and implications for physiotherapy of the following medications:
  Vasopressors/inotropes 84.6
  Basic electrolytes 100
  Anti-hypertensives 92.3
  Anti-arrhythmia 100
  Sedation and neuromuscular paralysing agents 61.5* 92
  Bronchodilators 92.3
  Mucolytics 69.3* 92
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can independently interpret findings from imaging investigations (excluding the imaging report) including:
  Chest radiographs 96.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can interpret the results from neurological equipment/examinations and functional tests including:
  Intra-cranial and cerebral perfusion pressure monitors 96.2
  An ability to interpret an assessment of sedation levels (e.g. Ramsey Sedation Scale, Riker, Richmond-Agitation Sedation Scale) 84.6
  An ability to perform a neurological examination of motor and sensory functions (e.g. light touch, pain) e.g. ASIA score 100
  An ability to interpret a Glasgow Coma Score 100
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can perform and accurately interpret the results of common respiratory examinations including:
  Observation of respiratory rate 100
  Patterns of breathing 96.2
  Palpate the chest wall 100
  Auscultation 100
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist understands the key principles of providing the following differing modes of mechanical/assisted ventilation including:
  CPAP 92.3
  PEEP/EPAP 96.2
  SIMV (volume)/(pressure) 69.2* 92
  BiLevel 46.2* 88
  PS/IPAP 92.3
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can assess and interpret mechanical ventilation settings/measurements including:
  Respiratory rate 96
  Peak inspiratory pressure 92.3
  Inspiration: expiration ratio 100
  Tidal volume 100
  Breath types (spontaneous, mandatory, assisted) 100
  The levels of FiO2 100
  The levels of PEEP 100
  The levels of PS 88.5
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can:
  Assess the effectiveness/quality of a patient’s cough 100
  Record and interpret observations from physical clinical examination
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can interpret indices from blood-gas measurement including:
  pH 100
  PaCO2 100
  PaO2, SpO2, SaO2 100
  HCO3 100
  Base excess 92.3
  P50 65.4 92
A physiotherapist can complete musculoskeletal and/or functional assessments including:
  Manual muscle testing 69.2* 84
  Range of motion 84.6
  Deep-vein thrombosis screening 100
  Peripheral oedema 92.3
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can understand equipment (including recognition of equipment) and understands the implications for physiotherapy of:
  Extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation 69.2* 80
  Intracranial pressure monitors and extra-ventricular drains 96.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can accurately interpret readings from clinical monitoring including:
  Advanced ECGs 80.8
  Nutritional status including feed administration, volume and type 61.5* 100
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can accurately interpret findings from laboratory investigations including:
  Haematocrit 96.2
  Creatinine kinase 96.2
  Neutrophil count 92.3
  Albumin 92.3
  Liver function tests 88.5
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist is aware of the actions and implications for physiotherapy of the following medications:
  Calcium channel blockers, cerebral diuretics, hypertonic saline 96.2
  Nitric oxide 92.3
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can independently interpret findings from imaging investigations (excluding the imaging report) including:
  Skeletal X-rays 96.2
  CT – Brain 100
  CT – Chest 100
  CT – Spine 100
  MRI – Brain 100
  MRI – Spine 96.2
  MRI – Chest 100
  Ultrasound – Chest 96.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can interpret the results from neurological equipment/examinations and functional tests including:
  Electroencephalograms 88.5
  An ability to perform a Glasgow Coma Score 100
  An ability to perform an assessment of sedation levels 100
  An ability to interpret an assessment of cranial nerve function 96.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist understands the key principles of providing the following differing modes of mechanical/assisted ventilation including:
  High frequency oscillatory ventilation 88.5
As a minimum standard, a physiotherapist can assess and interpret mechanical ventilation settings/measurements including:
  Static and/or dynamic lung compliance measurements 92.4
  Upper and lower inflection points of P-V curves 92.4
  Maximum inspiratory pressure measurements 92.4
  Maximum expiratory pressure measurements 88.5
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can:
  Assess the effectiveness/quality of a patient’s cough Record and interpret observations from physical clinical examination 100
  Perform respiratory function tests (e.g. for measurements of FEV1, FVC, PEF) 100
  Perform and interpret percussion note 96.2
  Measure peak cough flow on or off mechanical ventilation 84.6
  Measure peak inspiratory flow rate: Peak Expiratory Flow 80.8
  Perform a spontaneous breathing trial 96
  Interpret the rapid shallow breathing index 80.8
  Perform a swallow assessment 84.6
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can interpret indices from blood gas measurement including:
  PaO2/FiO2 ratio 100
  A-a gradient 61.6* 96
  Oxygen content (CaO2) 88.5
  Venous blood gas interpretation (including SvO2) 69.2* 88
A physiotherapist can complete musculoskeletal and/or functional assessments including:
  Dynamometry 88.5
  Objective measures of physical function 100
  Perform and Interpret Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool 92.3
  Objective measures of cardiopulmonary exercise tolerance 100
  Objective measures of quality of life 84.6
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can provide the following techniques, including an understanding of indication, contraindications, evidence for technique and progressions:
  Positive pressure devices for airway clearance (e.g. AstraPEP, PariPEP, TheraPEP, or oscillating expiratory pressure devices like Acapella, Flutter) 96.2
  Periodic/intermittent CPAP (non-invasive via mask) including initiation and titration of NIV/BiPAP – for Type I or Type II respiratory failure, initiation and titration of e.g. COPD exacerbation with hypercapnia 92.3
  NIV/BiPAP – intermittent, short term applications during physiotherapy to assist secretion mobilisation techniques or lung recruitment including initiation and titration of assisted coughing - subcostal thrusts for spinal cord injuries 57.7* 84
  Ventilator hyperinflation via an endotracheal tube or tracheostomy 46.2* 92
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can appropriately request/coordinate the following
  Titration of inotropes to achieve physiotherapy goals 82.6
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist is aware:
  Of key literature that guides evidence-based physiotherapy practice in critical care settings 96.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can accurately interpret readings from clinical monitoring including:
  Central venous pressure 100
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can accurately interpret findings from laboratory investigations including:
  Renal function tests e.g. urea and creatinine 100
  Sputum cultures 96.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can
  Determine the appropriateness of a patient for extubation 82.6
  Determine the appropriateness of a patient for tracheostomy decannulation 82.6

ECG = electrocardiogram; SpO2 = oxygen saturation; SvO2 = mixed venous oxygen saturation

APTT = activated partial thromboplastin time; INR = international normalised ratio; CPAP = continuous positive airway pressure

PEEP/EPAP = positive end-expiratory pressure; SIMV = synchronised intermittent mandatory ventilation; PS = pressure support

IPAP = inspiratory positive airway pressure; FiO2 = fraction of inspired oxygen; PaCO2 = partial pressure of CO2

PaO2 = partial pressure of O2; HCO3 = bicarbonate; P50 = oxygen tension at which haemoglobin is 50% saturated

CT = computed tomography; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; FEV1 = forced expiratory volume in one second

FVC = forced vital capacity; PEF = peak expiratory flow

*Consensus not reached (>70%) after considering the scored of ‘unsure’

Consensus not reached (>70%)

Table 3. Condition items determined as ‘essential’ (consensus >70%).

Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist understands pathophysiology and presenting features, likely medical management and implications for physiotherapy for a range of conditions including:
  Respiratory failure types I and II 100
  Community acquired/nosocomial/hospital-acquired pneumonia 100
  Pleural effusion 100
  Obstructive respiratory disease 100
  Restrictive respiratory disease 100
  Suppurative lung diseases 96.2
  Acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome 100
  Acute coronary syndrome 96.2
  Shock (cardiogenic) 100
  Heart failure 100
  Post-abdominal surgery 96.2
  Renal failure: acute and chronic 96.2
  Immunocompromise 92.3
  Systemic inflammatory response syndrome 96.2
  Shock (septic) 100
  Multi-organ failure 100
  ICU-acquired weakness 100
  Guillain-Barre Syndrome 68.2* 68 87.5
  Thromboembolic disease 96.2
  Intracerebral haemorrhage/Subarachnoid haemorrhage 100
  Traumatic brain injury 100
  Chest trauma 100
  Spinal cord injury 96.2
  Neuromuscular disease 96.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist understands pathophysiology and presenting features, likely medical management and implications for physiotherapy for a range of conditions including:
  Post-cardiac surgery 100
  Post-thoracic surgery 100
  Pancreatitis 88.5
  Metabolic/electrolyte disturbances 96.2
  Fat embolism 88.5
  Brain death and organ procurement 76.9
  Multi-trauma 96.2
  Sleep-disordered breathing (e.g. obstructive sleep apnoea, hypoventilation) 88.5
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can determine the appropriateness of a patient for:
  extubation 82.6
  tracheostomy decannulation 82.6
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist understands pathophysiology and presenting features, likely medical management and implications for physiotherapy for a range of conditions including:
  Hepatitis 69.3* 88
  Organ transplantation 92.3
  Burns 100

*Consensus not reached (>70%) after considering the scored of ‘unsure.’

Table 4. Treatment items determined as ‘essential’ (consensus >70%).

Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can provide the following techniques, including an understanding of indications, contraindications, evidence for the technique and progressions:
  Oxygen therapy including initiation and titration of oxygen therapy 92.3
  Humidification 88.5
  Active cycle of breathing technique 96.2
  Manual airway clearance techniques – percussion, vibration, chest shaking 100
  Intermittent positive pressure breathing 96.2
  Mechanical insufflation-exsufflation 84.6
  Supported coughing 92.3
  Directed coughing/instructing the patient to cough effectively 96.2
  Assisted coughing – chest wall 96.2
  Cough stimulation – oropharyngeal catheter stimulation 96.2
  Manual hyperinflation via an endotracheal tube or tracheostomy 92.3
  Nasopharyngeal airway suctioning, including insertion of NP airway 96.2
  Oropharyngeal airway suctioning, including insertion of OP airway 88.5
  Suction via a tracheal tube (ETT, tracheostomy, mini-tracheostomy) 100
  Instillation of normal saline into the endotracheal tube 88.5
  Patient positioning for respiratory care – including use of side lie, sitting upright, postural drainage (modified or head down tilt) 100
  Patient positioning for prevention of pressure ulcers, management of tone, maintenance of musculoskeletal function 100
  Mobilisation of non-ventilated patient 100
  Mobilisation of ventilated patient 96.2
  Bed exercises 96.2
  Nasal high flow 88.5
  Feldenkreis 61.5 68 87.5
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can appropriately request/coordinate the following:
  Titration of analgesia to achieve physiotherapy goals 53.8* 68 82.6
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist understands the key principles of providing the following differing modes of mechanical/assisted ventilation including:
  Assist-control 100
  Airway pressure release ventilation 96.2
  Weaning protocols 100
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can:
  Interpret respiratory function tests (e.g. for measurements of FEV1, FVC, PEF) 100
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can interpret indices from blood gas measurement including:
  Lactate 96.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist has knowledge of methods for advanced haemodynamic monitoring, can interpret the measurements and understands the implication of these for physiotherapists:
  Implanted or external pacemakers and determine presence of pacing on ECG 92.3
A physiotherapist can complete musculoskeletal and/or functional assessments including:
  Ability to assess tone (e.g. utilising a modified Ashworth scale) and reflexes
FEV1; FVC; PEF
96.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can provide the following techniques, including an understanding of indications, contraindications, evidence for the technique and progressions:
  Glottal stacking (frog breathing) 46.2* 100
  Other breathing techniques 100
  Autogenic drainage 88.5
  NIV/BiPAP - for use during exercise or mobilisation including initiation and titration 60* 84
  Cough stimulation - tracheal rub 96.2
  Recruitment maneuvers, e.g. staircase 92.3
  Bronchial lavage 80.8
  Assisting bronchoscopy via delivery of secretion 88.5
  Mobilisation techniques during the procedure 96.2
  Patient prone positioning in severe respiratory 84.6
  Failure/acute lung injury 96.2
  Inspiratory muscle training 100
  Splinting and/or casting for the upper limbs and lower limbs 100
  Collars 92.3
  Braces 96.2
  Treadmill, cycle ergometry or stationary bike, additional rehabilitation techniques (e.g. hydrotherapy, Wii) 96.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can:
  Non-invasive ventilation 69.3* 92

FEV1 = forced expiratory volume in one second

FVC = forced vital capacity

PEF = peak expiratory flow

*Consensus not reached (>70%) after considering the scored of ‘unsure’

Consensus not reached (>70%)

Table 5. Items not reaching any consensus.

Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can understand equipment (including recognition of equipment), understand the implications for physiotherapy of:
  Haemofiltration 61.5* 64 66.7
  Intra-aortic balloon pump 69.2 64 66.7
  Sengstaken-Blakemore/Minnesota tubes 60 48 50
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can interpret indices from blood gas measurement including:
  Anion gap 50 60 62.5*
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist has knowledge of methods for advanced haemodynamic monitoring, can interpret the measurements and understands the implication of these for physiotherapists:
  Pulmonary arterial catheter measurements 69.2 70.8* 66.7*
  PiCCO measurements 50 50 62.5*
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can accurately interpret findings from laboratory investigations including:
  Troponin 53.9* 66.7 66.7*
  C-reactive protein 63.7* 68 66.7
  Procalcitonin 57.7* 68 66.7
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist is aware of the actions and implications for physiotherapy of the following medications:
  Prostacyclin (PG12) 57.1* 60 62.5*
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can interpret the results from neurological equipment/examinations and functional tests including:
  Ability to perform a delirium assessment 65.4* 52 58.3
A physiotherapist can complete musculoskeletal and/or functional assessments including
  Bioimpedence testing of body composition 65.4* 56 66.7
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist understands pathophysiology and presenting features, likely medical management and implications for physiotherapy for a range of conditions including:
  Pancreatitis 60* 52 56.5
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can:
  Perform a cuff volume and/or pressure test on an endotracheal tube or tracheostomy 61.5 48 45.8
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can provide the following techniques, including an understanding of indications, contraindications, evidence for the technique and progressions:
  Performing bronchoscopy independently 57.7 44 58.3
As a minimum standard physiotherapist can:
  Intubate a patient 57.7 48 50
  Extubate a patient 65.4 64 54.2
  Lead the co-ordination of weaning protocols 61.5 60 58.3
  Lead the co-ordination of cuff deflation trials 48 48 45.8
  Lead the co-ordination of speaking valve trials 50 52 45.8
  Determine the appropriateness of a patient for tracheostomy decannulation 50 56 47.8
  Decannulate a tracheostomy 50 44 54.2
  Tracheostomy exchange 46.2 48 54.2
As a minimum standard a physiotherapist can appropriately request/coordinate the following:
  Titration of sedation to achieve physiotherapy goals 46.1* 64 66.6

*Consensus not reached (>70%) after considering the scored of ‘unsure’

Consensus not reached (>70%)

Discussion

The present study aimed to assess the consensus of experienced physiotherapists working in ICUs in Nigeria with the view of determining a consensus for minimum standards of clinical practice. The present study is important in our environment because of the growing concerns about the variability of skills, level of qualifications, postgraduate experiences and clinical practice acumen of physiotherapists treating critically ill patients. Earlier studies highlighted varying standards of education, changing the on-call services, reduction in workforce capacity and irregularity in staff entry level.[19,20] We considered physiotherapists with ≥5 years of work experience in critical care settings or emergency on-call services to be experts and those with <5 years of work experience as novices based on information from previous studies.[21,22] We utilised several means including snowballing sampling technique to reach as many physiotherapists as possible to participate in the present study.

We found that 197 items of knowledge and skills were judged to be ‘essential’ as a minimum standard of clinical practice in critical care settings following three rounds of online Delphi survey. Consensus was not reached to classify any question item from the questionnaire as ‘not essential’ for clinical practice. The results of the present study are similar to those of Takahashi et al.[12] who reported consensus for 199 items from a partially modified version of the Skinner et al.[10] questionnaire. Nevertheless, our findings are different from those in Australia[10] and the UK,[11] where consensus was reached for fewer items as ‘essential’ and ‘not essential’. We think that the experts in our study had comparatively lower experience and exposure in ICUs as they were more likely to have received little or no training, and they were practicing in a resourcelimited setting. It is important to note that the scope of practice of physiotherapists in the ICU differ across countries.[21,23]

We had a good response rate, considering the low number of physiotherapists with experience in ICU clinical practice in Nigeria. Our study also recorded very low dropout rates between rounds. Twose et al.[11] reported significantly higher dropout rates in their study (from 80% in round 1 to 65% in the final round). However, this is still within the accepted range for Delphi studies.[24] It must also be stated that several reminder messages were sent to non-responders via phone calls in addition to emphasising the need to observe the deadline.[25] In addition, sending the questionnaire via WhatsApp was helpful as most participants had smartphones. Overall, the number of participants in our study was small compared with other studies, but we considered them as having the best critical care experience in view of the strict inclusion criteria.

Participants in the present study ranked more items as ‘essential’, and no items as ‘non-essential’, unlike other studies that recorded several items from the same questionnaire (Australia,[10] New Zealand,[10] Japan[12] and UK[11]). Van Aswegen et al.[26] reported consensus was achieved on knowledge of normal integrated anatomy and physiology, knowledge of and skill to conduct a holistic assessment of an ICU patient, knowledge and skill of clinical reasoning, and knowledge of physiotherapy techniques by physiotherapists working in critical care units in South Africa. Another reason for the high number of ‘essential’ question items reaching a definite consensus after the final round was because we modified the questions not reaching consensus by providing definitions and examples during the second and third rounds. Therefore, the additional consensus obtained for these items that were modified could mean that our study participants may not have been conversant with some of the question items as presented in the Skinner et al.[10] questionnaire. Specifically, most of the items not reaching consensus appear to require intensive training and high clinical skills. Therefore, it is not surprising that items on intubation/extubation of patients, interpreting measurements in ICUs such as haemofiltration, pulmonary arterial catheter measurements, C-reactive protein as well as performing cuff volume and/or pressure test on an endotracheal tube or tracheostomy, among others, did not reach consensus.

The skills and knowledge that a physiotherapist needs to deliver services independently in critical care need to be streamlined.[27] Moreover, there is lack of standardised programmes for ICU physiotherapist education in our environment.[28] In the present Delphi study, the participants appeared to agree with the majority of the items on the questionnaire, with no tangible additional items suggested across the rounds. This may be because the requirements for practice are less strict in terms of scope and responsibilities of physiotherapists in Nigeria compared with many advanced countries.[29,30] We also observed that some question items such as the Feldenkrais technique, which is not common in our critical care settings, reached consensus after the third round, after alternative definitions and examples were provided. Furthermore, items like bronchial lavage, which is a diagnostic method of the lower respiratory system in which a bronchoscope is passed into the lungs with a measured amount of fluid introduced and then collected for examination, reached consensus in the first round without necessitating alternative definitions. This technique is typically outside the physiotherapist’s scope of practice, not popular in our environment and requires high technological and technical expertise. Hence, we cannot at the moment explain why the participants must have checked ‘essential’ for this item. Nevertheless, it is important that we could still draw attention to the consensus opinion of participants of the present study using this kind of question items. Moreover, more physiotherapists working in the critical care setting are increasingly having the opportunity to acquire further knowledge and skills from online ICU rehabilitation workshops delivered by people from all parts of the world. Our study offers a good first step in approaching institutions with possible items that could form a curriculum for training of physiotherapists who will work in ICUs in Nigeria. The existing curriculum in undergraduate physiotherapy programmes in Nigeria does not provide for teaching and clinical practice experience in most of the items checked as ‘essential’. Therefore, the use of graduate physiotherapists without additional specialised training in the ICU at postgraduate level may not be desirable.

Study limitations

The instrument from Skinner et al.[10] was not locally validated prior to administration in the present study. It was noted that the questionnaire was quite detailed, with many question items covering all aspects of critical care. Nevertheless, the study results are valid because we used a consensus to arrive at the items selected eventually. Participants were given a chance in the first round of the Delphi to provide additional inputs to the question items by means of open-ended questions requiring them to suggest additional questions. However, no further suggestions were made and this may mean that they were satisfied with the instrument or they had response exhaustion due to the many questions, as observed in previous Delphi studies.[31] In the present study, the questionnaire comprised many questions and required ~30 minutes to complete. Hence, participants were given up to 2 weeks to complete the questionnaire for each round. The critical care capacity, resources and manpower are relatively low and limited in Nigeria compared with developed countries,[32] so the number of physiotherapists who were available for recruitment was relatively small. Future studies should focus on testing the knowledge of physiotherapists working in the ICU contained in the ‘essential items’ reaching consensus with a view to ascertaining specific areas of need in this environment.

Conclusion

Expert consensus was achieved for a substantial number of questions on knowledge/skills of assessment, condition and treatment. These items could be considered as ‘essential’ minimum standards of clinical practice for physiotherapists working in ICUs, based on the opinion of experienced physiotherapists in Nigeria. The results of this present study need to be further validated by appropriate authorities to support development of training programmes and curricula for critical care physiotherapy specialisation in Nigeria with a view to reducing clinical practice variability and achieving acceptable quality in patient management.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Dr Aminudeen Abdurrahman for his invaluable insights during the revision of this manuscript. We would also like to thank the group/page handlers of the Nigeria Society of Physiotherapy and the Association of Clinical and Academic Physiotherapists in Nigeria on WhatsApp and Facebook for their help during the recruitment of the study participants.

References

  • 1.Hutchings A, Durand MA, Grieve R, et al. Evaluation of modernisation of adult critical care services in England: Time series and cost effectiveness analysis. BMJ. 2009;339:b4353. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b4353. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Masterson G, Baudouin S. 1st ed. London: Intensive Care Society; 2015. [accessed 12 September 2020]. Guidelines for the provision of intensive care services.https://www.ficm.ac.uk/sites/default/files/ Available from: [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Clini E, Ambrosino N. Early physiotherapy in the respiratory intensive care unit. Respir Med. 2005;99:1096–1104. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2005.02.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Zafiropoulos B, Alison JA, McCarren B. Physiological responses to the early mobilisation of the intubated, ventilated abdominal surgery patient. J Physiother. 2004;50:95–100. doi: 10.1016/s0004-9514(14)60101-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Gosselink R, Bott J, Johnson M, et al. Physiotherapy for adult patients with critical illness: Recommendations of the European Respiratory Society and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine Task Force on physiotherapy for critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. 2008;34:1188–1199. doi: 10.1007/s00134-008-1026-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Castro AA, Calil SR, Freitas SA, et al. Chest physiotherapy effectiveness to reduce hospitalisation and mechanical ventilation length of stay, pulmonary infection rate and mortality in ICU patients. Respir Med. 2013;107:68–74. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2012.09.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.National Health and Medical Research Council. Canberra: NHMRC; 1999. [accessed 12 September 2020]. A guide to the development, implementation, and evaluation of clinical practice guidelines.https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0029/143696/nhmrc_clinprgde.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Schultz MJ, Dunser MW, Dondorp AM, et al. Current challenges in the management of sepsis in ICUs in resource-poor settings and suggestions for the future. Intensive Care Med. 2017;1;43(5):612–612. doi: 10.1007/s00134-017-4750-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Bott J. Is respiratory care being sidelined. Physiother Front. 2002;27 [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Skinner EH, Thomas P, Reeve JC, et al. Minimum standards of clinical practice for physiotherapists working in critical care settings in Australia and New Zealand: A modified Delphi technique. Physiother Theor Pr. 2016;32:468–482. doi: 10.3109/09593985.2016.1145311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Twose P, Jones U, Cornell G. Minimum standards of clinical practice for physiotherapists working in critical care settings in the United Kingdom: A modified Delphi technique. J Intensive Care Soc. 2019;20:118–131. doi: 10.1177/1751143718807019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Takahashi T, Kato M, Obata K, et al. Minimum standards of clinical practice for physical therapists working in intensive care units in Japan. Phys Ther Res. 2020:E10060. doi: 10.1298/ptr.E10060. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Trevelyan EG, Robinson N. Delphi methodology in health research: How to do it? ;;7(4):423-428. Eur J Integr Med. 2015;7(4):423–428. doi: 10.1016/j.eujim.2015.07.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Riviello ED, Letchford S, Achieng L, Newton MW. Critical care in resource-poor settings: Lessons learned and future directions. Critical Care Med. 2011;39(4):860–867. doi: 10.1097/ccm.0b013e318206d6d5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Jünger S, Payne SA, Brine J, Radbruch L, Brearley SG. Guidance on conducting and reporting Delphi studies (CREDES) in palliative care: Recommendations based on a methodological systematic review. Palliat Med. 2017;31(8):684–706. doi: 10.1177/0269216317690685. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Vernon W. The Delphi technique: A review. Int J Ther Rehabil. 2009;16:69–76. doi: 10.12968/ijtr.2009.16.2.38892. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Duffield C. The Delphi technique: A comparison of results obtained using two expert panels. Int J Nurs Stud. 1993;30:227–237. doi: 10.1016/0020-7489(93)90033-Q. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Delbecq AL, Van de Ven AH. A group process model for problem identification and program planning. J Appl Behav Sci. 1971;7:466–492. doi: 10.1177/002188637100700404. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Gough S, Doherty J. Emergency on-call duty preparation and education for newly qualified physiotherapists: A national survey. Physiother. 2007;93:37–44. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2006.06.004. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Hayes K, Seller D, Webb M, Hodgson C, Holland A. Ventilator hyperinflation: A survey of current physiotherapy practice in Australia and New Zealand. New Zealand J Physiother. 2011;39:124. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Reeve JC. A survey of physiotherapy on-call and emergency duty services in New Zealand. New Zealand J Physiother. 2003;31(2):75–83. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Berney S, Haines K, Denehy L. Physiotherapy in critical care in Australia. Cardiopulm Phys Ther J. 2012;23(1):19–25. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Ambrosino N, Porta R. Rehabilitation, and acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Lung Bio Health Dis. 2004;183:507–530. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Casaburi R, Porszasz J, Burns MR, et al. Physiologic benefits of exercise training in rehabilitation of patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1997;155:1541–1551. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.155.5.9154855. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Hsu C-C, Sandford BA. The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Pract Assess Res Evaluation. 2007;12:10. doi: 10.7275/pdz9-th90. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Edwards P, Roberts I, Clarke M, et al. Increasing response rates to postal questionnaires: Systematic review. BMJ. 2002;324:1183. doi: 10.1136/bmj.324.7347.1183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Stiller K. Physiotherapy in intensive care: An updated systematic review. Chest. 2013;144:825–847. doi: 10.1378/chest.12-2930. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Van Aswegen H, Patman S, Plani N, et al. Developing minimum clinical standards for physiotherapy in South African ICUs: A qualitative study. J Eval Clin Pract. 2017;23:1258–1265. doi: 10.1111/jep.12774. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Balogun JA, Aka P, Balogun AO, et al. A phenomenological investigation of the first two decades of university-based physiotherapy education in Nigeria. Cogent Med. 2017;4:1301183. doi: 10.1080/2331205X.2017.1301183. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Okafor U. Challenges in critical care services in sub-Saharan Africa: Perspectives from Nigeria. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2009;13:25. doi: 10.4103/0972-5229.53112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Egleston BL, Miller SM, Meropol NJ. The impact of misclassification due to survey response fatigue on estimation and identifiability of treatment effects. Stat Med. 2011;30:3560–3572. doi: 10.1002/sim.4377. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Nwosu E, Nebo I, Kanu E, et al. Delivery of physiotherapy services in a critical care setting in Nigerian hospitals: The challenges. American Respir J Crit Care Med. 2020;201:E1635. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2020.201.1_MeetingAbstracts.A1653. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from African Journal of Thoracic and Critical Care Medicine are provided here courtesy of South African Medical Association

RESOURCES