Regional anaesthesia research - where to now?

Regional anaesthesia education for consultants and specialists in the UK: a mixed-methods analysis

BACKGROUND

Regional anaesthesia plays an important role in perioperative care, but gaps in proficiency persist among consultants and specialists. This study aimed to assess confidence levels in performing Plan A blocks among this cohort and to examine the barriers and facilitators influencing regional anaesthesia education.

METHODS

Utilising a mixed-methods design, we performed a quantitative survey to gauge self-reported confidence in performing Plan A blocks, coupled with qualitative interviews to explore the complexities of educational barriers and facilitators. UK consultant and specialist anaesthetists were included in the study.

RESULTS

A total of 369 survey responses were analysed. Only 22% of survey respondents expressed confidence in performing all Plan A blocks. Specialists (odds ratio [OR] 0.391, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.179-0.855, P=0.016) and those in their roles for >10 yr (OR 0.551, 95% CI 0.327-0.927, P = 0.024) reported lower confidence levels. A purposive sample was selected for interviews, and data saturation was reached at 31 interviews. Peer-led learning emerged as the most effective learning modality for consultants and specialists. Barriers to regional anaesthesia education included apprehensions regarding complications, self-perceived incompetence, lack of continuing professional development time, insufficient support from the multidisciplinary team, and a lack of inclusivity within the regional anaesthesia community. Organisational culture had a substantial impact, with the presence of local regional anaesthesia champions emerging as a key facilitator.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights persistent perceived deficiencies in regional anaesthesia skills among consultants and specialists. We identified multiple barriers and facilitators, providing insights for targeted interventions aimed at improving regional anaesthesia education in this group.

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.

Perioperative pain management models in four European countries: A narrative review of differences, similarities and future directions

There is general agreement that acute pain management is an important component of perioperative medicine. However, there is no consensus on the best model of care for perioperative pain management, mainly because evidence is missing in many aspects. Comparing the similarities and differences between countries might reveal some insights into different organisational models and how they work. Here, we performed a narrative review to describe and compare the structures, processes and outcomes of perioperative pain management in the healthcare systems of four European countries using Donabedian's framework as a guide. Our comparison revealed many similarities, differences and gaps. Different structures of acute pain services in the four countries with no common definition and standards of care were found. Protocols have been implemented in all countries and guidelines in some. If outcome is assessed, it is mainly pain intensity, and many patients experiencing more intense pain than others have common risk factors (e.g. preoperative pain, preoperative opioid intake, female sex and young age). Outcome assessment beyond pain intensity (such as pain-related physical function, which is important for early rehabilitation and recovery) is currently not well implemented. Developing common quality indicators, a European guideline for perioperative pain management (e.g. for patients at high risk for experiencing severe pain and other outcome parameters) and common criteria for acute pain services might pave the way forward for improving acute pain management in Europe. Finally, the education of general and specialist staff should be aligned in Europe, for example, by using the curricula of the European Pain Federation (EFIC).

Recent advancements in regional anaesthesia

Patient safety, improved quality of care, and better patient satisfaction and functional outcomes are currently the topmost priorities in regional anaesthesia (RA) and all advancements in RA move in this direction. Ultrasonography-guided central neuraxial and peripheral nerve blocks, intracluster and intratruncal injections, fascial plane blocks, diaphragm-sparing blocks, use of continuous nerve block techniques, and continuous local anaesthetic wound infiltration catheters are now topics of popular clinical interest. The safety and efficacy of nerve blocks can be improved with the help of injection pressure monitoring and the incorporation of advanced technology in the ultrasound machine and needles. Novel procedure-specific and motor-sparing nerve blocks have come up. The anaesthesiologist of the current era, with a good understanding of the sonoanatomy of the target area and the microarchitecture of nerves, along with the backup of advanced technology, can be very successful in performing RA techniques. RA is rapidly evolving and revolutionising the practice of anaesthesia.