Core outcome set for peripheral regional anesthesia research: a systematic review and Delphi study

Abstract

Background/importanceThere is heterogeneity among the outcomes used in regional anesthesia research.ObjectiveWe aimed to produce a core outcome set for regional anesthesia research.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and Delphi study to develop this core outcome set. A systematic review of the literature from January 2015 to December 2019 was undertaken to generate a long list of potential outcomes to be included in the core outcome set. For each outcome found, the parameters such as the measurement scale, timing and definitions, were compiled. Regional anesthesia experts were then recruited to participate in a three-round electronic modified Delphi process with incremental thresholds to generate a core outcome set. Once the core outcomes were decided, a final Delphi survey and video conference vote was used to reach a consensus on the outcome parameters.ResultsTwo hundred and six papers were generated following the systematic review, producing a long list of 224 unique outcomes. Twenty-one international regional anesthesia experts participated in the study. Ten core outcomes were selected after three Delphi survey rounds with 13 outcome parameters reaching consensus after a final Delphi survey and video conference.ConclusionsWe present the first core outcome set for regional anesthesia derived by international expert consensus. These are proposed not to limit the outcomes examined in future studies, but rather to serve as a minimum core set. If adopted, this may increase the relevance of outcomes being studied, reduce selective reporting bias and increase the availability and suitability of data for meta-analysis in this area.

Ultrasound‐guided genicular nerves block vs. local infiltration analgesia for total knee arthroplasty: a randomised controlled non‐inferiority trial

“…This limit is below the clinician-perceived minimal clinically important difference recently reported by Laigaard et al [10,16,25,26]. Likewise, it has been suggested recently that quality of recovery measurement should be performed routinely [27].…”

“…[10, 16, 25, 26]. Likewise, it has been suggested recently that quality of recovery measurement should be performed routinely [27]. However, a minimally clinical difference specific for total knee arthroplasty postoperative quality of recovery scores have not yet been described [28].…”

Variability between human experts and artificial intelligence in identification of anatomical structures by ultrasound in regional anaesthesia: a framework for evaluation of assistive artificial intelligence

“…This strategy of evaluation would allow standardisation, a concept that has become popular in other aspects of UGRA. 4 , 5 , 33 , 34 …”

Peripheral regional anaesthesia and outcomes: a narrative review of the literature from 2013 to 2023

“…Despite a large body of literature, the overall scientific quality of the research in the field of peripheral regional anaesthesia is limited. Despite specific publications regarding the definition of outcomes in peripheral regional anaesthesia, 133 there is still no definite consensus regarding the most relevant outcome measures. The Core Outcome Measures for Perioperative and Anaesthetic Care (COMPAC) initiative, where mortality, perioperative complications, resource use, and short-/long-term recovery are suggested as useful variables, also revealed the widespread inconsistency in outcome reporting.…”