Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Short, T. G.
Right arrow Articles by Tam, Y. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Short, T. G.
Right arrow Articles by Tam, Y. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, Vol 76, Issue 2 313-315, Copyright © 1996 by The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

SHORT COMMUNICATIONS

Prospective evaluation of pharmacokinetic model-controlled infusion of propofol in adult patients

T. G. Short, T. A. Lim and Y. H. Tam
Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, and The Prince of Wales Hospital, Hong Kong

We have tested prospectively the algorithm of White and Kenny for pharmacokinetic model-controlled infusion of propofol in 40 healthy Oriental adults. Anaesthesia consisted of a target-controlled infusion of propofol, 70% nitrous oxide and an infusion of alfentanil. For the first 20 patients studied, median performance error was -5%, median absolute performance error 19%, divergence -9% and wobble 6%. The model was revised to minimize the prediction error of the variable set and tested prospectively in another 20 patients. There was a deterioration in performance of the revised model. Performance statistics for the original model in all 40 patients were: median performance error 2% (range -34 to 69%), median absolute performance error 21% (6-69%), divergence -17% (-92 to 49%) and wobble 7% (2-34%). The algorithm was found to perform adequately in our Oriental patient population.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.