ArticleCureus2025
Regional Anesthesia as an Emergency Department Consulting Service: A Quality Improvement Pilot Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDespite evidence that regional anesthesia may facilitate earlier discharge and lower outpatient opioid utilization, a multitude of systemic and cultural barriers reduce the utilization of regional anesthesia in the emergency setting. An accessible regional anesthesia team was created to assess Emergency Department (ED) utilization of nerve blocks and their impact on patient pain improvement. MATERIALS AND
methodsED providers in a non-trauma hospital had a regional anesthesia team available as a consulting service for five months. Patients were enrolled based on inclusion criteria and at the discretion of the ED attending. Enrolled patients underwent peripheral nerve blocks with one of two anesthesiologists who were fellowship trained in Regional Anesthesiology. Patients were then contacted on post-procedure day 1 and were interviewed regarding their satisfaction with the process and their ultimate post-ED disposition.
resultsParticipation was limited due to multiple systemic and cultural factors. The majority of patients enrolled participated in the follow-up survey and rated their pain relief as 'Very Good' or 'Excellent' (n=9/14). Nearly all patients (n = 11/14) responded 'Strongly Agree' to whether they would use the same type of pain relief method in the future, and most (n=11/14) rated their overall experience with their pain management service as 'Excellent' or 'Very Good'.
conclusionThis pilot study showed that implementation of a regional anesthesia consulting service in the ED was feasible and that the majority of patients were satisfied with the quality of care and the timeframe in which they were provided regional anesthesia for acute pain.
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.