Research priorities in regional anaesthesia: an international Delphi study.

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.

ASSIST - Patient satisfaction survey in postoperative pain management from Indian subcontinent.

INTRODUCTION: To compare pain scores at rest and ambulation and to assess patient satisfaction between the different modalities of pain management at different time points after surgery. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: The ASSIST (Patient Satisfaction Survey: Pain Management) was an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicenter survey conducted among 1046 postoperative patients from India. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Pain scores, patient's and caregiver's satisfaction toward postoperative pain treatment, and overall pain management at the hospital were captured at three different time points through a specially designed questionnaire. The survey assessed if the presence of acute pain services (APSs) leads to better pain scores and patient satisfaction scores. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: One-way ANOVA was used to evaluate the statistical significance between different modalities of pain management, and paired t-test was used to compare pain and patient satisfaction scores between the APS and non-APS groups. RESULTS: The results indicated that about 88.4% of patients reported postoperative pain during the first 24 h after surgery. The mean pain score at rest on a scale of 1-10 was 2.3 ± 1.8 during the first 24 h after surgery and 1.1 ± 1.5 at 72 h; the patient satisfaction was 7.9/10. Significant pain relief from all pain treatment was reported by patients in the non-APS group (81.6%) compared with those in the APS (77.8%) group (P < 0.0016). CONCLUSION: This investigator-initiated survey from the Indian subcontinent demonstrates that current standards of care in postoperative pain management remain suboptimal and that APS service, wherever it exists, is yet to reach its full potential.