Skip Navigation

British Journal of Anaesthesia 2004 93(6):756-758; doi:10.1093/bja/aeh277
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Millar, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Millar, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2004

Editorial II: Fast-tracking in day surgery. Is your journey to the recovery room really necessary?

J. Millar

John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK, E-mail: jean.millar@nda.ox.ac.uk

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Fast-tracking, or bypassing the recovery room or Post Anaesthesia Care Unit (PACU), is claimed to streamline day surgery with faster patient recovery time and discharge and therefore reduced cost, particularly in the office-based surgery now popular in the United States.1–5 Many fast-tracking studies have looked at different anaesthetic regimes to achieve fast-track criteria and whether this resulted in shorter recovery times in those patients who were able to bypass recovery.5–9 Cost savings were assumed if more expensive phase I recovery was avoided. In this issue Song and colleagues10 are the first to look at this more rationally by prospectively randomizing patients having a standard general anaesthetic to fast-track or conventional recovery, and looking at outcomes, which included recovery times and costing.

While cost savings appear to be the driving motivation for fast-tracking, we also need to know if fast-tracking is safe and feasible, if it has any direct benefits for . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
A. Hadzic
Is Regional Anesthesia Really Better than General Anesthesia?
Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2005; 101(6): 1631 - 1633.
[Full Text] [PDF]