Research priorities in regional anaesthesia: an international Delphi study

IF 9.2 1区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY British journal of anaesthesia Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-05 DOI:10.1016/j.bja.2024.01.033
Jenny Ferry , Owen Lewis , James Lloyd , Kariem El-Boghdadly , Rachel Kearns , Eric Albrecht , Fernando Altermatt , Balakrishnan Ashokka , Amany E. Ayad , Ezzat S. Aziz , Lutful Aziz , Balavenkatasubramanian Jagannathan , Noreddine Bouarroudj , Ki Jinn Chin , Alain Delbos , Alex de Gracia , Vivian H.Y. Ip , Kwesi Kwofie , Sebastian Layera , Clara A. Lobo , Alan J.R. Macfarlane
{"title":"Research priorities in regional anaesthesia: an international Delphi study","authors":"Jenny Ferry ,&nbsp;Owen Lewis ,&nbsp;James Lloyd ,&nbsp;Kariem El-Boghdadly ,&nbsp;Rachel Kearns ,&nbsp;Eric Albrecht ,&nbsp;Fernando Altermatt ,&nbsp;Balakrishnan Ashokka ,&nbsp;Amany E. Ayad ,&nbsp;Ezzat S. Aziz ,&nbsp;Lutful Aziz ,&nbsp;Balavenkatasubramanian Jagannathan ,&nbsp;Noreddine Bouarroudj ,&nbsp;Ki Jinn Chin ,&nbsp;Alain Delbos ,&nbsp;Alex de Gracia ,&nbsp;Vivian H.Y. Ip ,&nbsp;Kwesi Kwofie ,&nbsp;Sebastian Layera ,&nbsp;Clara A. Lobo ,&nbsp;Alan J.R. Macfarlane","doi":"10.1016/j.bja.2024.01.033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Regional anaesthesia use is growing worldwide, and there is an increasing emphasis on research in regional anaesthesia to improve patient outcomes. However, priorities for future study remain unclear. We therefore conducted an international research prioritisation exercise, setting the agenda for future investigators and funding bodies.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We invited members of specialist regional anaesthesia societies from six continents to propose research questions that they felt were unanswered. These were consolidated into representative indicative questions, and a literature review was undertaken to determine if any indicative questions were already answered by published work. Unanswered indicative questions entered a three-round modified Delphi process, whereby 29 experts in regional anaesthesia (representing all participating specialist societies) rated each indicative question for inclusion on a final high priority shortlist. If ≥75% of participants rated an indicative question as ‘definitely’ include in any round, it was accepted. Indicative questions rated as ‘definitely’ or ‘probably’ by &lt;50% of participants in any round were excluded. Retained indicative questions were further ranked based on the rating score in the final Delphi round. The final research priorities were ratified by the Delphi expert group.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>There were 1318 responses from 516 people in the initial survey, from which 71 indicative questions were formed, of which 68 entered the modified Delphi process. Eleven ‘highest priority’ research questions were short listed, covering themes of pain management; training and assessment; clinical practice and efficacy; technology and equipment.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>We prioritised unanswered research questions in regional anaesthesia. These will inform a coordinated global research strategy for regional anaesthesia and direct investigators to address high-priority areas.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":9250,"journal":{"name":"British journal of anaesthesia","volume":"132 5","pages":"Pages 1041-1048"},"PeriodicalIF":9.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007091224000540/pdfft?md5=044926e1317da5f971cd44ea4f2f6f7d&pid=1-s2.0-S0007091224000540-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of anaesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0007091224000540","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Regional anaesthesia use is growing worldwide, and there is an increasing emphasis on research in regional anaesthesia to improve patient outcomes. However, priorities for future study remain unclear. We therefore conducted an international research prioritisation exercise, setting the agenda for future investigators and funding bodies.

Methods

We invited members of specialist regional anaesthesia societies from six continents to propose research questions that they felt were unanswered. These were consolidated into representative indicative questions, and a literature review was undertaken to determine if any indicative questions were already answered by published work. Unanswered indicative questions entered a three-round modified Delphi process, whereby 29 experts in regional anaesthesia (representing all participating specialist societies) rated each indicative question for inclusion on a final high priority shortlist. If ≥75% of participants rated an indicative question as ‘definitely’ include in any round, it was accepted. Indicative questions rated as ‘definitely’ or ‘probably’ by <50% of participants in any round were excluded. Retained indicative questions were further ranked based on the rating score in the final Delphi round. The final research priorities were ratified by the Delphi expert group.

Results

There were 1318 responses from 516 people in the initial survey, from which 71 indicative questions were formed, of which 68 entered the modified Delphi process. Eleven ‘highest priority’ research questions were short listed, covering themes of pain management; training and assessment; clinical practice and efficacy; technology and equipment.

Conclusions

We prioritised unanswered research questions in regional anaesthesia. These will inform a coordinated global research strategy for regional anaesthesia and direct investigators to address high-priority areas.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
区域麻醉的研究重点:国际德尔菲研究。
背景:区域麻醉的使用在全球范围内不断增长,人们也越来越重视对区域麻醉进行研究,以改善患者的治疗效果。然而,未来研究的重点仍不明确。因此,我们开展了一项国际性的优先研究工作,为未来的研究人员和资助机构制定议程:我们邀请来自六大洲的区域麻醉专业协会成员提出他们认为尚未解决的研究问题。我们将这些问题归纳为具有代表性的指示性问题,并进行了文献综述,以确定是否有任何指示性问题已在已发表的论文中得到解答。未回答的指示性问题进入三轮修改后的德尔菲流程,由 29 位区域麻醉专家(代表所有参与的专科学会)对每个指示性问题进行评分,以列入最终的高优先级候选名单。如果有≥75% 的参与者将某个指示性问题评为 "肯定 "列入任何一轮,则该问题即被接受。结果评定为 "肯定 "或 "可能 "的指示性问题:516 人对初步调查做出了 1318 个回答,从中形成了 71 个指示性问题,其中 68 个进入了修改后的德尔菲程序。最后列出了 11 个 "最优先 "研究问题,涵盖疼痛管理、培训与评估、临床实践与疗效、技术与设备等主题:我们优先考虑了区域麻醉中尚未解决的研究问题。这些问题将为区域麻醉的全球协调研究战略提供信息,并指导研究人员解决高优先级领域的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
488
审稿时长
27 days
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Anaesthesia (BJA) is a prestigious publication that covers a wide range of topics in anaesthesia, critical care medicine, pain medicine, and perioperative medicine. It aims to disseminate high-impact original research, spanning fundamental, translational, and clinical sciences, as well as clinical practice, technology, education, and training. Additionally, the journal features review articles, notable case reports, correspondence, and special articles that appeal to a broader audience. The BJA is proudly associated with The Royal College of Anaesthetists, The College of Anaesthesiologists of Ireland, and The Hong Kong College of Anaesthesiologists. This partnership provides members of these esteemed institutions with access to not only the BJA but also its sister publication, BJA Education. It is essential to note that both journals maintain their editorial independence. Overall, the BJA offers a diverse and comprehensive platform for anaesthetists, critical care physicians, pain specialists, and perioperative medicine practitioners to contribute and stay updated with the latest advancements in their respective fields.
期刊最新文献
Associate Editorial Board and cover image caption Prediction and risk evaluation of delirium after surgery in older patients: development and internal validation of an algorithm from the prospective BioCog cohort study. Documenting videolaryngoscopy and tracheal intubation: time to blend old ways with the new? Validation status of definitive airway management simulators: a systematic review. Responsibility cannot be abdicated: a mandate for Patient-Centred Precision Care in perioperative brain health
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1