Key result
Registry-based research in anaesthesia offers advantages like large sample sizes and real-world applicability, but its potential in the UK is currently limited by a lack of specific datasets.
Why the study?
Randomised controlled trials are rare due to expense and perceived lack of real-world applicability, while expanding routinely collected data offers opportunities but faces limitations and a lack of UK anaesthesia-specific datasets.
This narrative review highlights the potential of routinely collected data and registry-based trials in anesthesia, emphasizing the urgent need for a national anesthesia registry and standardized minimum datasets in the UK.
UK anaesthesia datasets limit registry research scale; leaves open need for national registries and standardized minima to enable real-world studies.
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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Armstrong et al. (2020) conducted a review in Anaesthesia and peri-operative care. Registry-based research and routinely collected data vs. Traditional randomized controlled trials was evaluated. Registry-based research in anaesthesia offers advantages like large sample sizes and real-world applicability, but its potential in the UK is currently limited by a lack of specific datasets.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: