Routinely collected data and patient-centred research in anaesthesia and peri-operative care: a narrative review
- PMID: 33201514
- PMCID: PMC8359324
- DOI: 10.1111/anae.15303
Routinely collected data and patient-centred research in anaesthesia and peri-operative care: a narrative review
Abstract
Randomised controlled trials are the gold standard in clinical research, but remain rare due to their expense and a perceived lack of 'real-world' applicability. At the same time, there has been an exponential increase in routinely collected data which presents opportunities for audit, quality improvement, adverse event reporting and more efficient clinical research. Registry-based research benefits from reduced cost, large sample size and real-world applicability, with methodological developments, particularly registry-based randomised controlled trials and causal inference techniques, showing promise. Limitations include data quality and validity, the need for data linkage, the restrictions of fixed data fields, regulatory barriers, and privacy and security concerns. However, the principal factor hampering current efforts is a lack of anaesthesia-specific datasets in the UK and the fact that most surgical registries do not collect any anaesthetic data. This presents an opportunity for anaesthetists, through enhanced engagement and collaboration, to influence and improve the design of these datasets and increase the value and volume of data collected. Better datasets, coupled with a growing appreciation of new analysis methodologies, would allow significant progress towards realising the potential of routinely collected data for patient benefit. At the same time, work should begin on the development of a minimum dataset for anaesthesia to underpin new data sharing networks and, ideally, a national registry of anaesthesia.
Keywords: electronic health records; peri-operative clinical trials; registries; registry trials; routinely collected health data.
© 2020 The Authors. Anaesthesia published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Anaesthetists.
References
-
- Gliklich R, Dreyer N, Leavy MB. Registries for Evaluating Patient Outcomes: A User's Guide, 3rd edn. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2014. - PubMed
-
- Drolet BC, Johnson KB. Categorizing the world of registries. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 2008; 41: 1009–20. - PubMed
-
- NHS Digital . Hospital Episode Statistics. 2020. https://digital.nhs.uk/data‐and‐information/data‐tools‐and‐services/data... (accessed 21/07/2020).
-
- American College of Surgeons . National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. https://www.facs.org/quality‐programs/acs‐nsqip (accessed 31/07/2020).
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
