Engaging patients in anesthesiology research: a rewarding frontier

Verret, Michael; Fergusson, Dean; Nicholls, Stuart G.; Graham, Megan; Zivkovic, Fiona; Lê, Maxime; Geist, Allison; Lam, Nhat Hung; Graham, Ian; Turgeon, Alexis F.; McIsaac, Daniel I.; Lalu, Manoj M

doi:10.1007/s12630-023-02432-3

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As detailed in our protocol and in a separate reflective article, 62 we used a collaborative approach involving multiple partner organisations and patient partners. We defined pharmacologic opioid minimisation strategy as any non-opioid drug with antinociceptive properties administered orally, intramuscularly, subcutaneously or intravenously during the intraoperative period.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 61 First, we ranked patient-centred outcome measure domains of interest based on potential impact and plausibility with our patient partners and partner organisations ( Table 1 ). 62 Patient wellbeing, assessed with the Quality of Recovery instrument was given the highest score. We also considered within the scope of patient-centred outcomes two additional domains, namely opioid-related (long-term use [≥1 month] and adverse effects [multidimensional assessment]) and pain-related (acute pain [multidimensional assessment, <3 months] and postoperative chronic pain [≥3 months]).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intraoperative pharmacologic opioid minimisation strategies and patient-centred outcomes after surgery: a scoping review

Verret,

Lam,

Lalu

et al. 2024

British Journal of Anaesthesia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intraoperative pharmacologic opioid minimisation strategies and patient-centred outcomes after surgery: a scoping review

Verret,

Lam,

Lalu

et al. 2024

British Journal of Anaesthesia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…By using a Bayesian framework, we will make efficient use of available trial results to facilitate clinical interpretation with probabilities. Open access of our approach can be found in a published article 56 and our terms of reference is also available online (https:// osf.io/afm3z/). Our team of knowledge user organisations include: SolvingPain (https://www.solvingpain.ca), Pain BC (https://painbc.ca), Health Canada (https:// www.canada.ca/en/health-canada.html), Réseau Québécois de Recherche sur la Douleur (https://qprn.ca/ fr/), Choosing Wisely (https://choosingwiselycanada.…”

Section: Implication Of the Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of dexmedetomidine during surgery under general anaesthesia on patient-centred outcomes: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis protocol

Verret,

Le,

Lalu

et al. 2024

BMJ Open

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionDexmedetomidine is a promising pharmaceutical strategy to minimise opioid use during surgery. Despite its growing use, it is uncertain whether dexmedetomidine can improve patient-centred outcomes such as quality of recovery and pain.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis following the recommendations of theCochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. We will search MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science and CINAHL approximately in October 2023. We will include randomised controlled trials evaluating the impact of systemic intraoperative dexmedetomidine on patient-centred outcomes. Patient-centred outcome definition will be based on the consensus definition established by the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine initiative (StEP-COMPAC). Our primary outcome will be the quality of recovery after surgery. Our secondary outcomes will be patient well-being, function, health-related quality of life, life impact, multidimensional assessment of postoperative acute pain, chronic pain, persistent postoperative opioid use, opioid-related adverse events, hospital length of stay and adverse events. Two reviewers will independently screen and identify trials and extract data. We will evaluate the risk of bias of trials using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (RoB 2.0). We will synthesise data using a random effects Bayesian model framework, estimating the probability of achieving a benefit and its clinical significance. We will assess statistical heterogeneity with the tau-squared and explore sources of heterogeneity with meta-regression. We have involved patient partners, clinicians, methodologists, and key partner organisations in the development of this protocol, and we plan to continue this collaboration throughout all phases of this systematic review.Ethics and disseminationOur systematic review does not require research ethics approval. It will help inform current clinical practice guidelines and guide development of future randomised controlled trials. The results will be disseminated in open-access peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and shared among collaborators and networks.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42023439896.

show abstract

“…44 Patients were involved in assessing the relevance of the scope of the review, determining the patient-centered outcomes to be accounted for, and planning dissemination of the work. 44 The final 4 studies brought together patients, caregivers, and clinicians to determine the top 10 most important research priorities in anesthesia and perioperative care in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. 37,39,41,43 Each of these studies asked patients and clinicians what questions they would like to see answered in future anesthesia research.…”

Section: Collaboratementioning

confidence: 99%

“…40 One article described the process of engaging patients in a scoping review that is intended to inform a later systematic review and ultimately a randomized control trial and opioid minimization strategies following surgery. 44 Patients were involved in assessing the relevance of the scope of the review, determining the patient-centered outcomes to be accounted for, and planning dissemination of the work. 44 The final 4 studies brought together patients, caregivers, and clinicians to determine the top 10 most important research priorities in anesthesia and perioperative care in the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia.…”

Section: Collaboratementioning

confidence: 99%

Anesthesiologists and Community Engagement: A Scoping Review of the Literature

Remmers,

Conroy,

Korom

et al. 2023

Anesthesia &Amp; Analgesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Millions of individuals require anesthesia services each year. Although anesthesia-associated mortality rates have declined, anesthetic-related morbidity remains high, particularly among vulnerable populations. Disparities in perioperative screening, optimization, surveillance, and follow-up contribute to worse outcomes in these populations. Community-engaged collaborations may be the essential ingredient needed for anesthesiologists to improve disparities in anesthetic outcomes and prioritize the needs of patients and communities. This scoping review seeks to examine the available literature on community engagement among anesthesiologists to identify gaps and seek opportunities for future work. This review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). OVID MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched to identify sources that used or recognized community-engaged strategies and involved the work of anesthesiologists. Sources were selected based on inclusion criteria and consistent data were extracted from each paper for compilation in a data chart. The initial search generated 1230 articles of which 16 met criteria for inclusion in the review. An updated search of the literature and reference scan of included sources resulted in 7 additional articles being included. The sources were grouped according to overarching themes and methods used and ultimately categorized according to the spectrum of public participation developed by the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2). This spectrum includes 5 levels: inform, consult, involve, collaborate, and empower. This review identified 5 sources at the inform level, 8 studies in consult, 0 in involve, 7 in collaborate, and 3 in empower. Results indicate that most initiatives representing deeper levels of community engagement, at the collaborate or empower level, occur internationally. Efforts that occur in the United States tend to emphasize engagement of individual patients rather than communities. There is a need to pursue deeper, more meaningful community-engaged efforts within the field of anesthesiology at a local and national level.

show abstract

Engaging patients in anesthesiology research: a rewarding frontier

Cited by 7 publications

References 24 publications

Intraoperative pharmacologic opioid minimisation strategies and patient-centred outcomes after surgery: a scoping review

Intraoperative pharmacologic opioid minimisation strategies and patient-centred outcomes after surgery: a scoping review

Effectiveness of dexmedetomidine during surgery under general anaesthesia on patient-centred outcomes: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis protocol

Anesthesiologists and Community Engagement: A Scoping Review of the Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About