Skip Navigation

British Journal of Anaesthesia 2005 94(3):393; doi:10.1093/bja/aei517
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 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 arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Parris-Piper, T.
Right arrow Articles by Sneyd, J. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Parris-Piper, T.
Right arrow Articles by Sneyd, J. R.
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 2005. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journal.permissions@oupjournals.org

CORRESPONDENCE

Recent advances in intravenous anaesthesia

E-mail: timwpp@hotmail.com

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Editor—I would like to respond to a section of Professor Sneyd's review article on ‘Recent advances in intravenous anaesthesia’.1 Despite an extensive and generally well researched review, I take issue with his comments on the use of propofol in obstetric anaesthesia.

He briefly dismisses propofol as being contraindicated for induction and . . . [Full Text of this Article]

T. Parris-Piper

Auckland, New Zealand

E-mail: robert.sneyd@pms.ac.uk

J. R. Sneyd

Plymouth, UK


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