Carol L. Hodgson, Alison E. Turnbull, Theodore J. Iwashyna, Ann Parker, Wesley Davis, Clifton O. Bingham, Nicola R. Watts, Simon Finfer, Dale M. Needham

There is increasing interest in measuring the quality of survivorship for patients admitted to the intensive care (ICU) for acute respiratory failure (ARF). However, there is substantial variability in the patient outcomes reported in studies evaluating these patients, with few data on which outcomes are essential to inform clinical practice. To determine clinicians' perspectives on the outcome domains that should always be reported in studies evaluating ARF survivors after hospital discharge, and to compare findings between the US and Australian perspectives. A survey was developed, including 19 possible domains, to iteratively elicit clinician's perspectives on core outcome domains via a modified Delphi method. The survey was initially administered online. The survey results were then discussed at in-person meetings independently at scientific conferences in US and Australia, and the survey was repeated at the meeting following this discussion. The number of partipants who responded to both the online and real-time polling was 44 of 100 (44%) in US and 78 of 85 (92%) in Australia. Most respondents were ICU-based clinicians (US 33 (75%) and Australia 76 (89%)). Of 19 domains evaluated, both the US and Australian groups ranked physical function and symptoms as the most important, with quality of life, cognitive function and symptoms, and survival being the next 3 most important, yielding a total of 4 domains meeting our criteria for inclusion as core domains at both meetings. Clinicians agreed that physical function and symptoms, quality of life, cognitive function and survival are domains that should always be measured in research evaluating ARF survivor outcomes after hospital discharge.