British Journal of Anaesthesia, Vol 83, Issue 4 564-570, Copyright © 1999 by The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia
I. Smith, P. A. Terhoeve, D. Hennart, P. Feiss, M. Harmer, J. L. Pourriat and IAT. Johnson
Day-case anaesthesia requires rapidly eliminated anaesthetics which are
relatively expensive. This multinational, multicentre European study
assessed the relative costs of propofol or sevoflurane anaesthesia in 211
patients. Anaesthesia was induced and maintained with propofol in group 1,
with propofol and sevoflurane in group 2, and with sevoflurane in group 3.
Drug and delivery costs were calculated in US$. Induction of anaesthesia
was fastest in groups 1 and 2, although spontaneous ventilation resumed
earliest in group 3. Emergence times and times at which patients were fit
for discharge were similar in all groups. Group 2 had the lowest costs
based on actual drug use (mean $14.2 (SEM 0.8) vs $18.7 (0.8) and $17.3
(0.8) in groups 1 and 3, respectively). Anaesthetic drug wastage and
disposable costs were highest in group 1 and lowest in group 3.
Consequently, total costs were highest in group 1 ($31.9 (0.9)) compared
with groups 2 ($19.7 (0.9)) and 3 ($18.8 (0.9)). Although we observed
increased nausea and vomiting in groups 2 and 3 and reduced patient
satisfaction in group 3, these differences should be balanced against the
greater cost of propofol anaesthesia.
CLINICAL INVESTIGATIONS
A multicentre comparison of the costs of anaesthesia with sevoflurane or propofol
Keele University, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, UK; Academic Hospital, Utrecht, Netherlands; University Hospital Erasme, Belgium; University of Limoges, France; University of Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff, UK; Universite Paris XIII, France; Stoke-on-Trent, UK
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. Gupta, T. Stierer, R. Zuckerman, N. Sakima, S. D. Parker, and L. A. Fleisher Comparison of Recovery Profile After Ambulatory Anesthesia with Propofol, Isoflurane, Sevoflurane and Desflurane: A Systematic Review Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2004; 98(3): 632 - 641. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. K. Hofer, A. Zollinger, S. Buchi, R. Klaghofer, D. Serafino, S. Buhlmann, C. Buddeberg, T. Pasch, and D. R. Spahn Patient well-being after general anaesthesia: a prospective, randomized, controlled multi-centre trial comparing intravenous and inhalation anaesthesia Br. J. Anaesth., November 1, 2003; 91(5): 631 - 637. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. R. Watson and M. V. Shah Clinical comparison of 'single agent' anaesthesia with sevoflurane versus target controlled infusion of propofol Br. J. Anaesth., October 1, 2000; 85(4): 541 - 546. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. S. Myles, J. O. Hunt, H. Fletcher, J. Smart, and T. Jackson Part I: Propofol, Thiopental, Sevoflurane, and Isoflurane--A Randomized, Controlled Trial of Effectiveness Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2000; 91(5): 1163 - 1169. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Jackson and P. S. Myles Part II: Total Episode Costs in a Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Effectiveness of Four Anesthetics Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2000; 91(5): 1170 - 1175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|