Cost analysis of sevoflurane anesthesia compared with propofol and remifentanil infusion.
- Author:
Sang Hoon LEE
1
;
Woo Jong SHIN
;
Woo Jae JEON
Author Information
1. Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. swj0208@hanyang.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial
- Keywords:
General anesthesia;
Propofol;
Sevoflurane
- MeSH:
Anesthesia;
Anesthesia, General;
Anesthetics;
Climate;
Cost Control;
Cost Savings;
Costs and Cost Analysis;
Humans;
Methyl Ethers;
Nebulizers and Vaporizers;
Pain, Postoperative;
Piperidines;
Propofol
- From:Anesthesia and Pain Medicine
2011;6(3):231-235
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Cost control in general anesthesia is no longer an option; it is a necessity. New anesthetics have entered the market, but economic differences in comparison to standard anesthetic regimens are not exactly known. The purpose of this study was to compare the cost of a sevoflurane-based strategy with a propofol-based general anesthetic technique. METHODS: Eighty patients undergoing elective surgery were randomly divided into two groups, with 40 patients each. The propofol group received propofol with remifentanil infusion, and the sevoflurane group received sevoflurane with N2O 50%, O2 50% for anesthesia. Sevoflurane consumption was measured by weighing the vaporizer using a precision weighing machine. We recorded the use of all drugs for the induction and maintenance of anesthesia, and postoperative pain control in the postoperative anesthesia care unit. RESULTS: The recovery characteristics were not significantly different in the two groups. Total (intra and postoperative) cost were significantly higher in the propofol group than in the sevoflurane group. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that in today's climate of cost savings, a comprehensive pharmacoeconomic approach is needed.
