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 (9)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hamid, S. K.
Right arrow Articles by Asbury, A. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hamid, S. K.
Right arrow Articles by Asbury, A. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, Vol 77, Issue 6 727-730, Copyright © 1996 by The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

CLINICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Comparison of patient-controlled sedation with either methohexitone or propofol

S. K. Hamid, N. McCann, L. McArdle and A. J. Asbury
University Department of Anaesthesia, Western Infirmary, Dumbarton Road, Glasgow G11 6NT; Glasgow Dental Hospital and School, Sauchiehall St, Glasgow G2 3JZ

We studied 42 patients undergoing oral surgery under local anaesthesia with i.v. sedation, allocated randomly to receive either methohexitone (group M) or propofol (group P) for patient-controlled sedation (PCS). Group M patients self-administered 2.5-mg (0.5 ml) bolus doses of methohexitone and group P, 5-mg (0.5 ml) doses of propofol, without a lockout. The 0.5-ml bolus dose was delivered over 7.2 s for both drugs. The procedure was completed satisfactorily in all patients. Patients in both groups achieved their desired levels of sedation. No patient lost verbal contact. Group M patients had higher heart rates during the procedure. The lowest SpO2 values recorded were 92% and 95% for group P and group M, respectively. Immediately after operation patients in group M reported that they felt more sleepy than those in group P (P < 0.01) but there were no differences at subsequent times. The results of the psychomotor tests were comparable for the two groups after operation, except for the "posting box task" at 15 min after operation when the mean decrement (compared with preoperative performance) was - 3% for group P and -13% for group M (P < 0.05). More patients in group P complained of pain in their hand. We conclude that methohexitone is a suitable alternative drug to propofol for PCS.
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.