Facilitators, Barriers and Reported Implementation Outcomes of Wide‐Awake Local Anaesthesia No Tourniquet in Hand Surgery Practice: A Systematic Scoping Review
- 1University of Newcastle Newcastle New South Wales Australia
- 2Newcastle Hand Institute Newcastle New South Wales Australia
- 3Hunter Medical Research Institute Newcastle New South Wales Australia
Abstract
Background: Wide‐Awake Local Anaesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT) is increasingly being used by hand surgeons. This systematic scoping review aims to identify and collate existing evidence on the reported implementation outcomes, barriers, facilitators and implementation strategies relevant to WALANT in hand surgery practice.
Methods: A systematic search was conducted across major medical databases as well as grey literature from inception to 13 February 2025. Studies were included if they reported on implementation outcomes, implementation strategies and/or the perspectives and experiences of clinicians, patients and other stakeholders. Included records were independently reviewed, with the data extracted and analysed narratively.
Results: Forty‐five studies were included: mostly observational, orthopaedic‐focused, hospital‐based, from North America and Europe. The evidence base was dominated by the outcomes of acceptability and cost, with little or no explicit reporting of feasibility, adoption, or penetration. Common barriers included patient anxiety, lack of knowledge and training, persistent misconceptions about safety, departmental and anaesthetist attitudes and limited resources. Key facilitators included positive patient experiences and feedback, the presence of surgical and departmental champions, educational resources and cost savings. Strategies assisting uptake included patient education, financial incentives and dedicated WALANT facilities.
Conclusion: WALANT implementation in hand surgery is influenced by a combination of perceived advantages, organisational and system‐level conditions, individual knowledge and beliefs and the presence of supportive champions and leadership. Future research should more explicitly evaluate how WALANT is implemented, sustained and scaled across different health care contexts.
Related
- Common barriers and facilitators to the implementation of digital medicine in chronic respiratory diseases: a systematic review of reviews
- Operationalising the Operational Guidance on Infant and Young Child Feeding in Emergencies: A Narrative Review of Implementation Strategies, Barriers, Facilitators, and Health System Integration in Humanitarian Settings
- Pre-implementation barriers and facilitators to implementing a physical activity guideline for community-dwelling older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a qualitative stakeholder study
- Intersectional Barriers to and Facilitators of Educational Inclusion for Persons With Disabilities in Low‐ and Middle‐Income Countries: A Systematic Literature Review
- A preliminary qualitative exploration of perceived barriers and facilitators prior to implementation of a pressure injury prevention program in home care: perspectives of care managers in Japan.
BibTeX
@article{roberts2026facilitators,
title = {{Facilitators, Barriers and Reported Implementation Outcomes of Wide‐Awake Local Anaesthesia No Tourniquet in Hand Surgery Practice: A Systematic Scoping Review}},
author = {Freya Roberts and Ali Gholamrezaei and Brett McClelland and Dion Sandoz and Tanya Burgess},
journal = {Anz Journal of Surgery},
year = {2026},
month = jun,
doi = {10.1111/ans.70736},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.70736},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Facilitators, Barriers and Reported Implementation Outcomes of Wide‐Awake Local Anaesthesia No Tourniquet in Hand Surgery Practice: A Systematic Scoping Review
AU - Freya Roberts
AU - Ali Gholamrezaei
AU - Brett McClelland
AU - Dion Sandoz
AU - Tanya Burgess
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/06/11
JO - Anz Journal of Surgery
DO - 10.1111/ans.70736
UR - https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.70736
AB - Background: Wide‐Awake Local Anaesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT) is increasingly being used by hand surgeons. This systematic scoping review aims to identify and collate existing evidence on the reported implementation outcomes, barriers, facilitators and implementation strategies relevant to WALANT in hand surgery practice. Methods: A systematic search was conducted across major medical databases as well as grey literature from inception to 13 February 2025. Studies were included if they reported on implementation outcomes, implementation strategies and/or the perspectives and experiences of clinicians, patients and other stakeholders. Included records were independently reviewed, with the data extracted and analysed narratively. Results: Forty‐five studies were included: mostly observational, orthopaedic‐focused, hospital‐based, from North America and Europe. The evidence base was dominated by the outcomes of acceptability and cost, with little or no explicit reporting of feasibility, adoption, or penetration. Common barriers included patient anxiety, lack of knowledge and training, persistent misconceptions about safety, departmental and anaesthetist attitudes and limited resources. Key facilitators included positive patient experiences and feedback, the presence of surgical and departmental champions, educational resources and cost savings. Strategies assisting uptake included patient education, financial incentives and dedicated WALANT facilities. Conclusion: WALANT implementation in hand surgery is influenced by a combination of perceived advantages, organisational and system‐level conditions, individual knowledge and beliefs and the presence of supportive champions and leadership. Future research should more explicitly evaluate how WALANT is implemented, sustained and scaled across different health care contexts.
SN - 1445-1433
SN - 1445-2197
ER -