Core outcome set for peripheral regional anesthesia research: a systematic review and Delphi study.
OUTCOMES
REGIONAL ANESTHESIA
analgesia
Journal
Regional anesthesia and pain medicine
ISSN: 1532-8651
Titre abrégé: Reg Anesth Pain Med
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9804508
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 Jul 2022
21 Jul 2022
Historique:
received:
16
05
2022
accepted:
12
07
2022
entrez:
21
7
2022
pubmed:
22
7
2022
medline:
22
7
2022
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
There is heterogeneity among the outcomes used in regional anesthesia research. We aimed to produce a core outcome set for regional anesthesia research. We 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. Two 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. We 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.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE
BACKGROUND
There is heterogeneity among the outcomes used in regional anesthesia research.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to produce a core outcome set for regional anesthesia research.
METHODS
METHODS
We 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.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Two 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.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
We 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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35863787
pii: rapm-2022-103751
doi: 10.1136/rapm-2022-103751
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© American Society of Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: EA received grants from the Swiss Academy for Anaesthesia Research, Lausanne, Switzerland; B. Braun Medical AG, Sempach, Switzerland; and the Swiss National Science Foundation to support his clinical research. EA has also received an honorarium from B. Braun Medical AG Switzerland, Sintetica Ltd UK and MSD AG Switzerland. BF declares honoraria from B. Braun, Sintetica, Brain Therapeutics and Hospitality Medovate. ERM chairs the American Society of Anaesthesiologists Committee on Regional Anesthesia and Acute Pain Medicine. He is a former director of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA). TA, AG, NH, DFJ, AJRM, AP, MPS, LT, SW, JW are members of the Board of Regional Anaesthesia UK (RA-UK). KE-B declares honoraria from GE Healthcare, Ambu, Fisher and Paykel, Edwards Lifesciences. AJRM declares honoraria and/or research funding from Intelligent Ultrasound. PM is a board member of European Diploma in Regional Anaesthesia (EDRA) and declares honoraria from B. Braun Medical and Medovate. AP declares honoraria from GE Healthcare, Butterfly Net, Sintetica UK and Pacira. KR was the President of the British Association of Day Surgery.