ArticleCanadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie2025
A standardized set of metrics to assess the quality of anesthesia, perioperative care, and acute pain management in Canada: a multidisciplinary modified Delphi study.
Article in Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to develop a consensus list of metrics to measure the quality of care in anesthesia, perioperative care, and acute pain management in Canada.
methodsWe sought to conduct a modified Delphi study involving a multidisciplinary panel of perioperative health care professionals (anesthesiologists, surgeons, nurses, internal medicine and family medicine physicians, and hospital administrators), patients, and caregivers. Participants reviewed a candidate list of metrics synthesized from a previous scoping review and performed three rounds of independent iterative scoring and feedback to achieve consensus. In round 3, we asked participants to identify priority metrics to include in a list of core metrics, and we also asked health care professionals to assess the feasibility of implementing each metric.
resultsThere were 80 participants (49 health care professionals, 22 patients, and 9 caregivers) who completed at least one round of voting, with 56 completing all three rounds. The panel achieved consensus on 87 metrics, of which they deemed 33 to be priority core metrics. The health care professional and patient/caregiver subgroups differed in prioritizing core metrics. Most participants voted airway complications, no residual neuromuscular blockade, difficult airway documentation, complication or critical incident reporting, and complications from pain management the highest priority metrics. Most health care professional participants considered the core metrics to be already measured, currently feasible, or likely feasible by 2025.
conclusionsA multidisciplinary panel developed a list of metrics for measuring the quality of anesthesiology care in Canada. Many metrics require further refinement and validation, and future research is required to guide the measurement techniques and implementation approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40394406What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.