- Recommendation ID
- Anaesthesia:- What is the clinical and cost effectiveness of regional versus general anaesthesia on postoperative morbidity in patients with hip fracture?
- Any explanatory notes
- Why this is important:- No recent randomised controlled trials were identified that fully address this question. The evidence is old and does not reflect current practice. In addition, in most of the studies the patients are sedated before regional anaesthesia is administered, and this is not taken into account when analysing the results. The study design for the proposed research would be best addressed by a randomised controlled trial. This would ideally be a multi-centre trial including 3000 participants in each arm. This is achievable given that there are about 70,000 to 75,000 hip fractures a year in the UK. The study should have three arms that look at spinal anaesthesia versus spinal anaesthesia plus sedation versus general anaesthesia; this would separate those with regional anaesthesia from those with regional anaesthesia plus sedation. The study would also need to control for surgery, especially type of fracture, prosthesis and grade of surgeon.
A qualitative research component would also be helpful to study patient preference for type of anaesthesia.
Source guidance details
- Comes from guidance
- Hip fracture: management
- Date issued
- June 2011
|Is this a recommendation for the use of a technology only in the context of research?||No|
|Is it a recommendation that suggests collection of data or the establishment of a register?||No|