Development and Methodology of a Registry of Regional Anaesthesia

  • Michael J. Barrington

Key Points

  • Prospectively collecting regional anaesthesia procedure-related data allows monitoring of quality of care and identification of problematic practices that may lead to complications or adverse events.

  • Monitoring the quality and safety of regional anaesthesia is of paramount importance for informed patient consent and clinical decision-making.

  • Serious, adverse events are infrequent or rare in regional anaesthesia, therefore documenting them requires large patient samples.

  • Proactively monitoring for adverse events in new healthcare processes is recommended, one example being ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve blockade. In the 2000s this emerged as a significant potential advance in clinical practice popularizing peripheral nerve blockade globally.

  • With periodic updates to practice guidelines and the ever-changing development of new approaches and technologies, use of a regional anaesthesia registry or database allows practitioners to make comparative analysis across time.

  • Clinical registries and databases facilitate qualitative, evidence-based assessment of practice, allowing less reliance on expert consensus or practice based on outdated dogma. Registries can also overcome limitations of cost and frequent lack of statistical powering associated with randomized clinical trials.

  • Registries/databases should be designed to collect as complete a dataset relating to the procedure as possible, including patient demographics, surgical information, anaesthetic type and dosage, and clinical effectiveness outcomes. Data recording and entry methods should be standardized and simple to use.


Prospective studies Registries Nerve block Development Methodology 



The Australasian Regional Anaesthesia Collaboration


The American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine


The Australian and New Zealand Registry of Regional Anaesthesia


United States Institute of Medicine


The International Registry of Regional Anesthesia


Local anesthetic systemic toxicity


Peripheral nerve blockade


Postoperative nerve injury


Randomized controlled trials


  1. 1.
    Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 2000.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lagasse RS. Indicators of anesthesia safety and quality. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2002;15:239–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pilcher DV, Hoffman T, Thomas C, Ernest D, Hart GK. Risk-adjusted continuous outcome monitoring with an EWMA chart: could it have detected excess mortality among intensive care patients at Bundaberg Base Hospital? Crit Care Resusc. 2010;12:36–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Walshe K, Offen N. A very public failure: lessons for quality improvement in healthcare organisations from the Bristol Royal Infirmary. Qual Health Care. 2001;10:250–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gibbs NB. Safety of anaesthesia: a review of anaesthesia-related mortality in Australia and New Zealand 2006–2008. Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists: Melbourne; 2012.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McNicol L, Mackay P. Anaesthesia-related morbidity in Victoria: a report from 1990 to 2005. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2010;38:837–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee LA, Posner KL, Cheney FW, Caplan RA, Domino KB. Complications associated with eye blocks and peripheral nerve blocks: an American society of anesthesiologists closed claims analysis. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2008;33:416–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Webb RK, Currie M, Morgan CA, Williamson JA, Mackay P, Russell WJ, Runciman WB. The Australian Incident Monitoring Study: an analysis of 2000 incident reports. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1993;21:520–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brull R, Wijayatilake DS, Perlas A, Chan VW, Abbas S, Liguori GA, Hargett MJ, El-Beheiry H. Practice patterns related to block selection, nerve localization and risk disclosure: a survey of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2008;33:395–403.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Auroy Y, Benhamou D, Bargues L, Ecoffey C, Falissard B, Mercier FJ, Bouaziz H, Samii K. Major complications of regional anesthesia in France: The SOS Regional Anesthesia Hotline Service. Anesthesiology. 2002;97:1274–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aromaa U, Lahdensuu M, Cozanitis DA. Severe complications associated with epidural and spinal anaesthesias in Finland 1987-1993. A study based on patient insurance claims [see comment]. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1997;41:445–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Welch MB, Brummett CM, Welch TD, Tremper KK, Shanks AM, Guglani P, Mashour GA. Perioperative peripheral nerve injuries: a retrospective study of 380,680 cases during a 10-year period at a single institution. Anesthesiology. 2009;111:490–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barrington MJ, Snyder GL. Neurologic complications of regional anesthesia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2011;24:554–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee LA, Posner KL, Domino KB, Caplan RA, Cheney FW. Injuries associated with regional anesthesia in the 1980s and 1990s: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology. 2004;101:143–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neal JM, Bernards CM, Hadzic A, Hebl JR, Hogan QH, Horlocker TT, Lee LA, Rathmell JP, Sorenson EJ, Suresh S, Wedel DJ. ASRA practice advisory on neurologic complications in regional anesthesia and pain medicine. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2008;33:404–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Di Gregorio G, Neal JM, Rosenquist RW, Weinberg GL. Clinical presentation of local anesthetic systemic toxicity: a review of published cases, 1979 to 2009. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2010;35:181–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gray AT. Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia: current state of the art. Anesthesiology. 2006;104:368–73, discussionGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marhofer P, Chan VW. Ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia: current concepts and future trends. Anesth Analg. 2007;104:1265–9, tablesGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hannenberg AA, Warner MA. The registry imperative. Anesthesiology. 2009;111:687–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Porter ME, Teisberg EO. How physicians can change the future of health care. JAMA. 2007;297:1103–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khuri SF. The NSQIP: a new frontier in surgery. Surgery. 2005;138:837–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Neuman MD, Fleisher LA. Using quality improvement databases to advance medical knowledge: opportunities and challenges. Anesthesiology. 2009;110:449–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    McNeil JJ, Evans SM, Johnson NP, Cameron PA. Clinical-quality registries: their role in quality improvement. Med J Aust. 2010;192:244–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bufalino VJ, Masoudi FA, Stranne SK, Horton K, Albert NM, Beam C, Bonow RO, Davenport RL, Girgus M, Fonarow GC, Krumholz HM, Legnini MW, Lewis WR, Nichol G, Peterson ED, Rumsfeld JS, Schwamm LH, Shahian DM, Spertus JA, Woodard PK, Yancy CW. The American Heart Association’s recommendations for expanding the applications of existing and future clinical registries: a policy statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2011;123:2167–79.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vlahakes GJ. The value of phase 4 clinical testing. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:413–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tu JV, Hannan EL, Anderson GM, Iron K, Wu K, Vranizan K, Popp AJ, Grumbach K. The fall and rise of carotid endarterectomy in the United States and Canada. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1441–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hannan EL, Kilburn Jr H, Lindsey ML, Lewis R. Clinical versus administrative data bases for CABG surgery. Does it matter? Med Care. 1992;30:892–907.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    James S, Frobert O, Lagerqvist B. Cardiovascular registries: a novel platform for randomised clinical trials. Heart. 2012;98:1329–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hannan EL, Cozzens K, King III SB, Walford G, Shah NR. The New York State cardiac registries: history, contributions, limitations, and lessons for future efforts to assess and publicly report healthcare outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:2309–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pronovost PJ, Nolan T, Zeger S, Miller M, Rubin H. How can clinicians measure safety and quality in acute care? Lancet. 2004;363:1061–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mulroy MF, Hejtmanek MR. Prevention of local anesthetic systemic toxicity. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2010;35:177–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mangano DT, Tudor IC, Dietzel C. The risk associated with aprotinin in cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:353–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mariette X, Gottenberg JE, Ravaud P, Combe B. Registries in rheumatoid arthritis and autoimmune diseases: data from the French registries. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2011;50:222–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Shahian DM, O’Brien SM, Sheng S, Grover FL, Mayer JE, Jacobs JP, Weiss JM, Delong ER, Peterson ED, Weintraub WS, Grau-Sepulveda MV, Klein LW, Shaw RE, Garratt KN, Moussa ID, Shewan CM, Dangas GD, Edwards FH. Predictors of long-term survival after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery: results from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (the ASCERT study). Circulation. 2012;125:1491–500.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    van Vollenhoven RF, Askling J. Rheumatoid arthritis registries in Sweden. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2005;23:S195–200.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Vikatmaa P, Mitchell D, Jensen LP, Beiles B, Bjorck M, Halbakken E, Lees T, Menyhei G, Palombo D, Troeng T, Wigger P, Venermo M. Variation in clinical practice in carotid surgery in nine countries 2005-2010. Lessons from VASCUNET and recommendations for the future of national clinical audit. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2012;44:11–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Jacob AK, Mantilla CB, Sviggum HP, Schroeder DR, Pagnano MW, Hebl JR. Perioperative nerve injury after total knee arthroplasty: regional anesthesia risk during a 20-year cohort study. Anesthesiology. 2011;114:311–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Liu SS, Gordon MA, Shaw PM, Wilfred S, Shetty T, Yadeau JT. A prospective clinical registry of ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia for ambulatory shoulder surgery. Anesth Analg. 2010;111:617–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sites BD, Taenzer AH, Herrick MD, Gilloon C, Antonakakis J, Richins J, Beach ML. Incidence of local anesthetic systemic toxicity and postoperative neurologic symptoms associated with 12,668 ultrasound-guided nerve blocks: an analysis from a prospective clinical registry. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2012;37:478–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rohrbaugh M, Kentor ML, Orebaugh SL, Williams B. Outcomes of shoulder surgery in the sitting position with interscalene nerve block: a single-center series. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2013;38:28–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Polaner DM, Taenzer AH, Walker BJ, Bosenberg A, Krane EJ, Suresh S, Wolf C, Martin LD. Pediatric Regional Anesthesia Network (PRAN): a multi-institutional study of the use and incidence of complications of pediatric regional anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2012;115:1353–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bateman BT, Mhyre JM, Ehrenfeld J, Kheterpal S, Abbey KR, Argalious M, Berman MF, Jacques PS, Levy W, Loeb RG, Paganelli W, Smith KW, Wethington KL, Wax D, Pace NL, Tremper K, Sandberg WS. The risk and outcomes of epidural hematomas after perioperative and obstetric epidural catheterization: a report from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group Research Consortium. Anesth Analg. 2013;116:1380–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Jernberg T, Attebring MF, Hambraeus K, Ivert T, James S, Jeppsson A, Lagerqvist B, Lindahl B, Stenestrand U, Wallentin L. The Swedish Web-system for enhancement and development of evidence-based care in heart disease evaluated according to recommended therapies (SWEDEHEART). Heart. 2010;96:1617–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Pedersen AB, Mehnert F, Odgaard A, Schroder HM. Existing data sources for clinical epidemiology: The Danish Knee Arthroplasty Register. Clin Epidemiol. 2012;4:125–35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hopewell S, Altman DG, Moher D, Schulz KF. Endorsement of the CONSORT Statement by high impact factor medical journals: a survey of journal editors and journal ‘Instructions to Authors’. Trials. 2008;9:20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ghimire S, Kyung E, Kang W, Kim E. Assessment of adherence to the CONSORT statement for quality of reports on randomized controlled trial abstracts from four high-impact general medical journals. Trials. 2012;13:77.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Barrington MJ, Watts SA, Gledhill SR, Thomas RD, Said SA, Snyder GL, Tay VS, Jamrozik K. Preliminary results of the Australasian Regional Anaesthesia Collaboration: a prospective audit of more than 7000 peripheral nerve and plexus blocks for neurologic and other complications. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2009;34:534–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Anaesthesia and Acute Pain MedicineSt. Vincent’s Hospital, MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health SciencesMelbourne Medical School, University of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations