ArticleBMJ open2025
Development of actionable quality indicators and an implementation toolkit for perioperative opioid stewardship in colorectal cancer in the UK Yorkshire and Humber region: a modified RAND consensus study.
Article in BMJ open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThere are global concerns about the rise in opioid prescribing. Patients undergoing potentially curative surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC) are at high risk of adverse outcomes from opioid-related complications, including delayed discharge and adjuvant chemotherapy, long-term opioid use and reduced cancer-free survival. We aimed to develop a set of actionable quality indicators for opioid stewardship for patients undergoing CRC surgery, and an implementation toolkit to support professional behaviour change to improve appropriateness of perioperative opioid prescribing.
designA five-round modified RAND consensus process was conducted in 2021-2024.
setting14 secondary care trusts across the UK Yorkshire and Humber region.
participantsConsultant anaesthetists and national perioperative opioid stewardship experts (expert panel) and patient and public panel.
interventionsPotential indicators were identified from a literature review, guideline search and expert panel. All potential indicators were rated on relevance and actionability (online survey, expert panel) and importance to patient care (online meeting, patient panel). A hybrid consensus meeting involving a patient representative and the expert panel discussed and rerated the indicators. An online expert survey identified potential barriers to implementation. An actionable toolkit was developed using implementation strategies and supporting resources developed where appropriate.
results73 potential indicators were identified. All indicators remained in the process through the online survey and patient panel. After the final meeting, four indicators remained: (1) hospital trust presence of an opioid stewardship protocol; (2) inpatient functional post-operative pain assessments; (3) patient education and discharge leaflet; and (4) senior clinician review of 'strong' opioids on discharge (British National Formulary definition). The number of barriers identified ranged from 8 to 22 per indicator. 49 different implementation strategies were identified for the toolkit (range 32-45 per indicator).
conclusionsWe identified four actionable quality indicators and developed an implementation toolkit that represents consensus in defining quality of care in opioid stewardship for CRC surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.