JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
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 Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lennox, P. H.
Right arrow Articles by Vaghadia, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lennox, P. H.
Right arrow Articles by Vaghadia, H.
Related Collections
Right arrow Economics and Health Care Research
Right arrow Monitoring (Non-cardiac)
Right arrow Regional Anesthesia
Anesth Analg 2002;94:565-568
© 2002 International Anesthesia Research Society

AMBULATORY ANESTHESIA

Selective Spinal Anesthesia Versus Desflurane Anesthesia in Short Duration Outpatient Gynecological Laparoscopy: A Pharmacoeconomic Comparison

Pamela H. Lennox, MB MRCPI, FCARCSI, Colin Chilvers, B MED DA (UK), FANZCA, and Himat Vaghadia, MB BS, MHSc, FRCPC, FFARCS

Department of Anesthesia, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Himat Vaghadia, Department of Anesthesia, JPP 2449, Vancouver General Hospital, 855 West 12th Avenue, Vancouver, BC, Canada V5Z 1M9. Address e-mail to hvaghadi{at}vanhosp.bc.ca

We compared the cost and effectiveness of selective spinal anesthesia (SSA) with a desflurane-based general anesthetic (DES) for outpatient gynecological laparoscopy. A prospective analysis was undertaken of 10 patients randomized to receive SSA and compared with 10 patients randomized to receive DES. The groups were well matched in their demographic characteristics. The mean cost (in 2000 Canadian dollar values) of anesthesia supplies, drugs, and nursing for the SSA group of $62.31 was less than that for the DES group of $92.31 (P < 0.01). Recovery costs of both groups were similar. Time to administer anesthesia and time spent in the postanesthetic care unit were also similar. Postoperative analgesia was required by 50% of the DES group but in no patient receiving SSA (P < 0.01). SSA is a cost-effective alternative to DES in these patients.

IMPLICATIONS: Small-dose spinal anesthesia is an effective alternative to a desflurane general anesthetic in terms of cost and recovery profiles in ambulatory gynecological laparoscopy.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
C. Gonano, U. Leitgeb, C. Sitzwohl, G. Ihra, C. Weinstabl, and S. C. Kettner
Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Orthopedic Surgery: Anesthesia Drug and Supply Costs
Anesth. Analg., February 1, 2006; 102(2): 524 - 529.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
M. Schuster, A. Gottschalk, J. Berger, and T. Standl
A Retrospective Comparison of Costs for Regional and General Anesthesia Techniques
Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2005; 100(3): 786 - 794.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 2002 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.