title: Identifying research priorities in anaesthesia and perioperative care: final report of the joint National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia/James Lind Alliance Research Priority Setting Partnership.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To identify research priorities for Anaesthesia and Perioperative Medicine.
  
  
  METHODS
  Prospective surveys and consensus meetings guided by an independent adviser.
  
  
  METHODS
  UK.
  
  
  METHODS
  45 stakeholder organisations (25 professional, 20 patient/carer) affiliated as James Lind Alliance partners.
  
  
  RESULTS
  First 'ideas-gathering' survey: Free text research ideas and suggestions. Second 'prioritisation' survey: Shortlist of 'summary' research questions (derived from the first survey) ranked by respondents in order of priority. Final 'top ten': Agreed by consensus at a final prioritisation workshop.
  
  
  RESULTS
  First survey: 1420 suggestions received from 623 respondents (49% patients/public) were refined into a shortlist of 92 'summary' questions. Second survey: 1718 respondents each nominated up to 10 questions as research priorities. Top ten: The 25 highest-ranked questions advanced to the final workshop, where 23 stakeholders (13 professional, 10 patient/carer) agreed the 10 most important questions: ▸ What can we do to stop patients developing chronic pain after surgery? ▸ How can patient care around the time of emergency surgery be improved? ▸ What long-term harm may result from anaesthesia, particularly following repeated anaesthetics?▸ What outcomes should we use to measure the 'success' of anaesthesia and perioperative care? ▸ How can we improve recovery from surgery for elderly patients? ▸ For which patients does regional anaesthesia give better outcomes than general anaesthesia? ▸ What are the effects of anaesthesia on the developing brain? ▸ Do enhanced recovery programmes improve short and long-term outcomes? ▸ How can preoperative exercise or fitness training, including physiotherapy, improve outcomes after surgery? ▸ How can we improve communication between the teams looking after patients throughout their surgical journey?
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Almost 2000 stakeholders contributed their views regarding anaesthetic and perioperative research priorities. This is the largest example of patient and public involvement in shaping anaesthetic and perioperative research to date.
authors.affiliation: Surgical Outcomes Research Centre, University College Hospital, London, UK Health Services Research Centre, National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia, London, UK.
authors.forename: Oliver
authors.initials: O
authors.lastname: Boney
authors.affiliation: Royal College of Anaesthetists, London, UK.
authors.forename: Madeline
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Bell
authors.affiliation: Royal College of Anaesthetists, London, UK.
authors.forename: Natalie
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Bell
authors.affiliation: Association for Perioperative Practice, Harrogate, UK.
authors.forename: Ann
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Conquest
authors.affiliation: Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital Patient Group, Stanmore, UK.
authors.forename: Marion
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Cumbers
authors.affiliation: Royal College of Anaesthetists, London, UK.
authors.forename: Sharon
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Drake
authors.affiliation: Health Services Research Centre, National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia, London, UK Royal College of Anaesthetists, London, UK.
authors.forename: Mike
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Galsworthy
authors.affiliation: Independent Cancer Patients' Voice, London, UK.
authors.forename: Jacqui
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Gath
authors.affiliation: Surgical Outcomes Research Centre, University College Hospital, London, UK Health Services Research Centre, National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia, London, UK Integrative Physiology and Critical Illness Group, Clinical and Experimental Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK Critical Care Research Area, Southampton NIHR Respiratory Biomedical Research Unit, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK.
authors.forename: Michael P W
authors.initials: MP
authors.lastname: Grocott
authors.affiliation: The Kangaroo Club, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.
authors.forename: Emma
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Harris
authors.affiliation: Royal College of Anaesthetists, London, UK.
authors.forename: Simon
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Howell
authors.affiliation: Oesophageal Patients' Association, Solihull, UK.
authors.forename: Anthony
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Ingold
authors.affiliation: Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (AAGBI), London, UK.
authors.forename: Michael H
authors.initials: MH
authors.lastname: Nathanson
authors.affiliation: Royal College of Surgeons (England), London, UK.
authors.forename: Thomas
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Pinkney
authors.affiliation: The James Lind Alliance, NIHR Evaluation Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Southampton, UK.
authors.forename: Leanne
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Metcalf
mesh_terms: D000758:Anesthesia / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D035843:Biomedical Research; D006801:Humans; D007400:Interprofessional Relations; D010348:Patient Care Team / Q000458:organization & administration; D019990:Perioperative Care / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000517:prevention & control; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D006113:United Kingdom
keywords: ANAESTHETICS; INTENSIVE & CRITICAL CARE; SURGERY