Cargando…
Comparative evaluation of cost effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane in laparoscopic cholecystectomy
BACKGROUND: Anesthetic agents should be chosen not only on the basis of safety-efficacy profile, but also on the economic aspect. Propofol and sevoflurane are commonly utilized anesthetic agent for general anesthesia. AIM: The present study was designated to compare cost-effectiveness and recovery p...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4563962/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26417120 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0259-1162.156290 |
_version_ | 1782389357030670336 |
---|---|
author | Singh, Yashpal Singh, Anil P. Jain, Gaurav Yadav, Ghanshyam Singh, Dinesh Kumar |
author_facet | Singh, Yashpal Singh, Anil P. Jain, Gaurav Yadav, Ghanshyam Singh, Dinesh Kumar |
author_sort | Singh, Yashpal |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Anesthetic agents should be chosen not only on the basis of safety-efficacy profile, but also on the economic aspect. Propofol and sevoflurane are commonly utilized anesthetic agent for general anesthesia. AIM: The present study was designated to compare cost-effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane for induction, maintenance or both. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Randomized controlled, participant and data operator blinded trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized into three equal groups to receive: Group P to receive injection propofol for both induction and maintenance; Group PS to receive injection propofol for induction and sevoflurane for maintenance; and Group S to receive sevoflurane for both induction and maintenance of general anesthesia, respectively. Cost analysis, hemodynamic parameter, and recovery profile were compared between these groups. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: One-way analysis of variance test or Fisher's exact test/Chi-square test whichever appropriate. RESULTS: Total cost of anesthesia was highest in Group P and lowest in Group S. Mean time to extubation and time to follow verbal commands was lowest in Group S than Group P or Group P/S. Hemodynamic parameter was more stable in Group S. CONCLUSION: We conclude that sevoflurane appears to be better anesthetic agents in terms of cost-effectiveness and recovery profile. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4563962 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45639622015-09-28 Comparative evaluation of cost effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane in laparoscopic cholecystectomy Singh, Yashpal Singh, Anil P. Jain, Gaurav Yadav, Ghanshyam Singh, Dinesh Kumar Anesth Essays Res Original Article BACKGROUND: Anesthetic agents should be chosen not only on the basis of safety-efficacy profile, but also on the economic aspect. Propofol and sevoflurane are commonly utilized anesthetic agent for general anesthesia. AIM: The present study was designated to compare cost-effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane for induction, maintenance or both. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Randomized controlled, participant and data operator blinded trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ninety patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomized into three equal groups to receive: Group P to receive injection propofol for both induction and maintenance; Group PS to receive injection propofol for induction and sevoflurane for maintenance; and Group S to receive sevoflurane for both induction and maintenance of general anesthesia, respectively. Cost analysis, hemodynamic parameter, and recovery profile were compared between these groups. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: One-way analysis of variance test or Fisher's exact test/Chi-square test whichever appropriate. RESULTS: Total cost of anesthesia was highest in Group P and lowest in Group S. Mean time to extubation and time to follow verbal commands was lowest in Group S than Group P or Group P/S. Hemodynamic parameter was more stable in Group S. CONCLUSION: We conclude that sevoflurane appears to be better anesthetic agents in terms of cost-effectiveness and recovery profile. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015 /pmc/articles/PMC4563962/ /pubmed/26417120 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0259-1162.156290 Text en Copyright: © Anesthesia: Essays and Researches http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Singh, Yashpal Singh, Anil P. Jain, Gaurav Yadav, Ghanshyam Singh, Dinesh Kumar Comparative evaluation of cost effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane in laparoscopic cholecystectomy |
title | Comparative evaluation of cost effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane in laparoscopic cholecystectomy |
title_full | Comparative evaluation of cost effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane in laparoscopic cholecystectomy |
title_fullStr | Comparative evaluation of cost effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane in laparoscopic cholecystectomy |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative evaluation of cost effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane in laparoscopic cholecystectomy |
title_short | Comparative evaluation of cost effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane in laparoscopic cholecystectomy |
title_sort | comparative evaluation of cost effectiveness and recovery profile between propofol and sevoflurane in laparoscopic cholecystectomy |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4563962/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26417120 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0259-1162.156290 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT singhyashpal comparativeevaluationofcosteffectivenessandrecoveryprofilebetweenpropofolandsevofluraneinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy AT singhanilp comparativeevaluationofcosteffectivenessandrecoveryprofilebetweenpropofolandsevofluraneinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy AT jaingaurav comparativeevaluationofcosteffectivenessandrecoveryprofilebetweenpropofolandsevofluraneinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy AT yadavghanshyam comparativeevaluationofcosteffectivenessandrecoveryprofilebetweenpropofolandsevofluraneinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy AT singhdineshkumar comparativeevaluationofcosteffectivenessandrecoveryprofilebetweenpropofolandsevofluraneinlaparoscopiccholecystectomy |