1
|
Moreels T, Cruyt E, De Baets S, Andries L, Arts-Tielemans M, Rodriguez-Bailon M, Bergström A, Boete K, Bormans I, Costa U, Declercq H, Dekelver S, Dekyvere V, Delooz E, Engels C, Helderweirt S, Jarrey M, Lenaerts A, Leyman A, Lim KH, Meynen L, Satink T, Schoenmakers F, Senn D, Slembrouck L, Van Meensel E, Vangenechten D, Van Paepeghem B, De Vriendt P, Van de Velde D. Self-Management Analysis in Chronic Conditions (SMACC) checklist: an international consensus-based tool to develop, compare and evaluate self-management support programmes. BMJ Open 2023; 13:e075676. [PMID: 38128945 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-075676] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The Self-Management Analysis in Chronic Conditions (SMACC) checklist was developed as a guidance tool to support the development, comparison and evaluation of self-management support programmes for persons with a chronic condition. The checklist was based on a previously performed concept analysis of self-management. The aim of this study was to validate its content using an international Delphi study and to deliver a final version. DESIGN A two-round Delphi study was conducted between October 2022 and January 2023. Using the researchers' networks, professionals with research or clinical expertise in self-management support and chronic conditions were recruited via online purposive snowball sampling. Participants were asked to score each item of the checklist (16 items total) on 3 content validity indicators: (1) clarity and comprehensibility, (2) relevance and importance and (3) degree of alignment with the overall goal of the checklist to promote adequate and comprehensive self-management support programmes. A consensus threshold of 75% agreement was used. The participants were also asked general questions about the checklist as a whole and were asked to provide feedback considering its refinement. RESULTS Fifty-four professionals with an average 14.5 years of experience participated in round 1, 48 with an average 12.5 years of experience participated in round 2. The majority of professionals were from Western Europe. For the majority of items consensus was reached after round 1. In round 2, 3 of the 4 remaining items reached consensus, 1 last item was retained based on highly recurring feedback. CONCLUSIONS The SMACC checklist was considered a valid and comprehensive tool to aid the development, evaluation and comparison of self-management support programmes. It was acknowledged as a useful instrument to supplement existing frameworks and was seen as feasible to implement in both research and clinical settings. Further validation in the field, with input from patients and peer experts, will be valuable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Timothy Moreels
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
- Department of Nephrology, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Ellen Cruyt
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Stijn De Baets
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
- Department of Gerontology and Frailty in Ageing Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium
| | - Lore Andries
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Magelien Arts-Tielemans
- Department of Occupational Therapy, HAN University of Applied Science, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Aileen Bergström
- Karolinska Institutet Department of Neurobiology Care Sciences and Society, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Kyara Boete
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Iris Bormans
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Ursula Costa
- Occupational Science, Health University of Applied Science Tyrol, Tyrol, Austria
| | - Hanne Declercq
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Sari Dekelver
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Virginie Dekyvere
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Eva Delooz
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Cynthia Engels
- Clinical Epidemiology and Ageing Unit, Université Paris Est Créteil (UPEC), Créteil, France
| | - Sam Helderweirt
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Mike Jarrey
- Occupational Therapy, Artevelde University College, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Anneleen Lenaerts
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Anneleen Leyman
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Kee Hean Lim
- Department of Health Sciences, St Mary's Hospital Medical School, London, UK
| | - Louise Meynen
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Ton Satink
- Department of Occupational Therapy, HAN University of Applied Science, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Daniela Senn
- Occupational Therapy, ZHAW School of Health Professions, Winterthur, Switzerland
| | - Lise Slembrouck
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Emma Van Meensel
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | - Dani Vangenechten
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
| | | | - Patricia De Vriendt
- Department of Gerontology and Frailty in Ageing Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium
- Occupational Therapy, Artevelde University College, Ghent, Belgium
| | | |
Collapse
|