JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (40) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Maranets, I. Articles by Kain, Z. N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Maranets, I. Articles by Kain, Z. N.

---

AMBULATORY ANESTHESIA

Preoperative Anxiety and Intraoperative Anesthetic Requirements

Inna Maranets, MD^*, and Zeev N. Kain, MD^,

Departments of *Anesthesiology, Pediatrics, and Child Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine and Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Zeev N. Kain, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar St., New Haven, CT 06510. Address e-mail to kain{at}biomed.med.yale.edu

	Abstract

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 
The purpose of this study was to determine whether larger doses of anesthetics are required in the anxious patient to establish and maintain a clinically sufficient hypnotic component of the anesthetic state. Fifty-seven women undergoing bilateral laparoscopic tubal ligation with a propofol-based anesthetic regimen were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Trait (baseline) and state (situational) anxiety were assessed in all patients immediately before surgery, and the propofol doses required for the induction and maintenance of anesthesia were recorded. A bispectral index monitor was used to assure that the hypnotic component of the anesthetic state was the same in all patients. We found that patients with high trait anxiety required more propofol for both the induction (2.1 ± 0.4 vs 1.8 ± 0.3 mg/kg; P = 0.01) and maintenance of anesthesia (170 ± 70 vs 110 ± 20 µg · kg^-1 · min^-1; P = 0.02), compared with patients with low trait anxiety. State anxiety, however, was not found to affect the propofol doses required for the induction or maintenance of anesthesia. Multiple regression models confirmed that Trait anxiety is an independent predictor for intraoperative propofol requirements (P = 0.02). We conclude that increased baseline (i.e., trait) anxiety is associated with increased intraoperative anesthetic requirements. Thus, we suggest that the initial dose of anesthetic administered by an anesthesiologist should be modified based on the anxiety level exhibited by the patient.

Implications: The goal of this study was to assess the relationship between preoperative anxiety and intraoperative anesthetic requirements. We found that high baseline anxiety predicts increased intraoperative anesthetic requirements. We suggest that anesthesiologists should modify the initial induction dose based on the anxiety level exhibited by the patient.

	Introduction

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 
Preoperative anxiety is described as an unpleasant state of uneasiness or tension that is secondary to a patient being concerned about a disease, hospitalization, anesthesia and surgery, or the unknown (1). The reported incidence of preoperative anxiety in adults ranges from 11% to 80%, depending on the assessment method. The highest incidence was reported by psychiatrists using a validated psychological questionnaire (2), whereas the lowest was reported in studies using clinical impression only (3). Currently, data exist with respect to the effects of anxiety and fear before surgery on preoperative outcomes, such as heart rate, blood pressure, and neuroendocrinological changes (4), and postoperative outcomes, such as behavioral recovery and pain and analgesic requirements (5,6). There is a paucity of data, however, regarding the effects of preoperative anxiety on intraoperative outcomes. Nonetheless, it is assumed from clinical experience that larger doses of anesthetics are required in the anxious patient to establish and maintain a clinically sufficient hypnotic component of the anesthetic state.

Although some review articles indicate that increased anxiety before surgery is associated with increased intraoperative anesthetic requirements (7,8), this suggestion is based on earlier studies with questionable scientific validity (9–11). Some of these studies did not use validated scales to measure the predictor (i.e., anxiety), and others did not control for potential confounding variables, such as sedative premedication and the surgical procedure (9). Perhaps the most significant limitation of all previous studies, however, is their failure to control for anesthetic depth during the surgical procedure. That is, one can administer various doses of the same anesthetic to achieve "general anesthesia." Thus, the end point to which we titrate the anesthetic must be quantified a priori. A new electroencephalograph (EEG) monitor that uses bispectral analysis to generate a single number, termed the bispectral index (BIS), has been introduced into clinical practice (12). Bispectral analysis is a signal processing technique that decomposes the EEG and quantifies the level of synchronization in the signal, along with the traditional amplitude and frequency variables. This new monitor has been suggested to serve for measurement and monitoring of the hypnotic component of the anesthetic state (13–16).

Thus, through the introduction of this newer technology and the use of total IV anesthesia, we reexamined the question of whether increased anxiety before surgery is associated with increased intraoperative anesthetic requirements.

	Methods

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 
After institutional review board approval, 57 consecutive ASA physical status I or II women undergoing general anesthesia and bilateral laparoscopic tubal ligation were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Patients with a history of a psychiatric illness, patients taking psychotropic medications, and those undergoing termination of pregnancy and tubal ligation were excluded. On the day of surgery, after recruitment, demographic data—including age, race, gender, marital status, educational level, income, and history of previous hospitalizations and surgery—were obtained. Next, trait and situational anxiety were assessed using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and coping strategy was assessed using the Monitor-Blunter Style Scale (MBSS). No sedative premedication was offered to any of the patients.

The STAI is a widely used self-report anxiety assessment instrument (17). The STAI State subscale is designed to measure transitory anxiety states—that is, subjective feelings of apprehension, tension, and worry that vary in intensity and fluctuate based on the situation. The STAI Trait subscale measures relatively stable individual differences in anxiety proneness—that is, differences in the tendency to experience anxiety.

The MBSS was developed for patients undergoing medical procedures and identifies information seekers (high monitor)/information avoiders (low monitors) and distracters (high blunters)/nondistracters (low blunters) (18,19). The MBSS assesses coping style through four scenarios of stressful situations (i.e., "you are on an airplane that is experiencing severe turbulence..." etc.).

In the operating room, ASA standard monitors were applied. The EEG was recorded continuously using an Aspect A1000 Spectral EEG monitor (Aspect Medical Systems, Natick, MA). Along with an analog EEG, this device also provides a single BIS value (0–100) thought to be a measure of the hypnotic component of general anesthesia (16). Higher BIS values indicate lighter (more awake) hypnotic states (20). A BIS value of 40–60 indicates loss of consciousness and recall (16). General anesthesia was induced using propofol 1 mg/kg, followed by alfentanil 30 µg/kg. The propofol loading dose was mixed with IV 1% lidocaine at a ratio of 1:10. After observing patients for clinical response and allowing for BIS equilibration (60 s), additional small-increment doses of propofol (10–20 mg) were administered to achieve a BIS value of 40–60. Vecuronium 1 mg/kg was then administered to facilitate endotracheal intubation. Anesthesia was maintained with 50% O₂/N₂O and a continuous infusion of 0.5 µg · kg^-1 · min^-1 IV alfentanil. A propofol infusion was started at 120–140 µg · kg^-1 · min^-1 and was adjusted to maintain a BIS value of 40–60. The investigators responded to changes in the BIS by changing the infusion rate by 10%. For example, if the BIS increased from 55 to 65, the propofol rate was increased by 10%. The investigator administering the propofol was blinded to the preoperative STAI state and trait anxiety scores. After surgery, the propofol and alfentanil infusions were discontinued, and the neuromuscular block was reversed using neostigmine and glycopyrrolate. Induction and maintenance doses of all anesthetics and the length of infusion were recorded.

The main association we examined was the amount of propofol required for the induction of anesthesia versus the level of preoperative anxiety as measured by using the STAI. Given previous reports and preliminary data obtained in our institution, a correlation hypothesis of r = 0.35 was presumed. For such an r with a two-sided level of 0.05 and a power of 0.80, at least 55 patients were required to complete this study. Data were analyzed with the use of SPSS version 8.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). Demographic data are summarized as the mean ± SD for interval data and by cross-tabulation for nominal data. The association between preoperative anxiety, trait anxiety, and coping style to intraoperative propofol bolus and intraoperative infusion rate was first measured by a Pearson correlation coefficient (r). The cohort of patients was next stratified into three groups based on their state and trait anxiety scores: low-anxiety group (<25% STAI scores; n = 15), medium-anxiety group (25%–75% STAI scores; n = 28), and high-anxiety group (>75% STAI scores; n = 14). Stratification was performed based on Spielberger’s manual (17). Induction and intraoperative propofol requirements of the three groups were compared by using a one-way analysis of variance. The Bonferroni post hoc analysis was used to locate the differences among the three groups and to correct for multiple comparisons. Finally, a stepwise linear regression analysis was used to determine which of the variables deemed relevant by the literature and our data could predict the intraoperative anesthetic requirement of propofol. All multiple regression models were performed using the SPSS computer program. Comparisons were considered significant if P < 0.05.

	Results

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 
Fifty-seven patients were enrolled in this study. Baseline characteristics are presented in Table 1. The patients were women 21–41 (31 ± 5) yr old; 64% had undergone a previous surgery. Self-report anxiety of the patients, as assessed using the STAI before surgery, was 44 ± 12, and the Trait anxiety was 40 ± 9. The average propofol bolus patients required for the induction of anesthesia was 1.85 ± 0.45 (1.0–2.7) mg/kg. An average of 140 ± 50 (80–270) µg · kg^-1 · min^-1 IV propofol was required intraoperatively for the maintenance of anesthesia. The propofol infusion time ranged from 19 to 103 min (median 36 min), and the duration of surgery ranged from 31 to 120 min (median 48 min).

View larger version (16K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Figure 1. Correlation coefficient between trait anxiety and intraoperative anesthetic requirements. STAI = State-Trait Anxiety Inventory.

When the low, medium, and high state anxiety groups were compared, however, no differences were found for the induction (1.7 ± 0.4 vs 1.9 ± 0.5 vs 1.9 ± 0.4 mg/kg; P = 0.32) or maintenance propofol doses required (120 ± 50 vs 150 ± 50 vs 140 ± 40 µg ·kg^-1 · min^-1; P = 0.45).

Multiple Regression Analysis
To evaluate the unique contribution of each variable to the prediction of intraoperative anesthetic requirements, two stepwise multiple regression models were constructed. In the first, the propofol bolus required for induction was the dependent variable, and the independent variables included trait anxiety, age, social status, previous surgery, and race. We found that the overall model accounted for 25% of the variance, with trait anxiety accounting for 13% of the variance (F = 3.2, P = 0.02) and race accounting for 10% of the variance (F = 1.73, P = 0.03). In the second model, intraoperative propofol requirement was the dependent variable, and the independent variables included trait anxiety, age, social status, previous surgery, and race. We found that the overall model accounted for 31% of the variance, with trait anxiety accounting for 16% of the variance (F = 2.5, P = 0.01) and race accounting for 8% of the variance (F = 1.8, P = 0.02).

	Discussion

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 
Our goal was to assess the relationship between preoperative anxiety and intraoperative anesthetic requirements, controlling for the hypnotic component of the anesthetic state and surgical procedure. We found that situational (i.e., state) anxiety immediately before surgery is not associated with intraoperative anesthetic requirements. In contrast, high baseline (i.e., trait) anxiety does predict increased intraoperative anesthetic requirements.

Previous studies published in the psychological and anesthesia literature have yielded contradictory findings. Williams et al. (9) suggested that highly anxious patients require a greater amount of sodium thiopental to induce anesthesia than less anxious patients. This study, however, did not use validated measures to assess preoperative anxiety and did not control for potentially confounding variables, such as sedative premedication, surgical procedure, and depth of anesthesia (9). Goldman et al. (11) assessed state anxiety in 53 women presenting for gynecological surgery who underwent the induction of general anesthesia using alfentanil and methohexitone. The investigators reported that preoperative anxiety seems to correlate with the amount of methohexitone required, but this relationship was not statistically significant. As with the study by Williams et al., the investigators did not define the end point for administering additional methohexitone boluses in their patients.

At the onset of the present investigation, we realized the various methodological limitations of previous studies. These limitations may in part be explained by the fact that previous means to assess anesthetic depth were either not precise or too complex to interpret (e.g., EEG); therefore, it was difficult to determine exact anesthetic requirements. "State of anesthesia" is suggested to consist of a triad: unconsciousness and lack of recall, analgesia, and muscle relaxation (22). It is now recognized that because individual anesthetics provide a unique spectrum of pharmacological actions, the concept of "anesthetic depth" must be revised to reflect the three components of the anesthetic state (16). As the BIS monitor has been reported to measure the hypnotic component of the anesthetic state (15,22,23), we decided to incorporate this technology into our study. That is, using the BIS monitor allowed us to compare the anesthetic requirements necessary to maintain the same hypnotic state (i.e., predefined end point) for the same surgical procedure. In addition, BIS monitoring has been reported to be particularly useful when used with patients undergoing propofol-based anesthetics (16).

We also recognized a priori that 1) a validated measure to assess anxiety must be used; 2) the anesthetic technique must be well defined; and 3) the surgical procedure must be controlled. The best known tool for anxiety evaluation is Spielberger’s STAI, which has been used in more than 1000 research studies published in peer-reviewed literature (24). In fact, the STAI was referred to recently in a major anesthesia journal as the "gold standard" for measuring preoperative anxiety (25). In this investigation, we used the STAI to assess both the situational (state) and the baseline (trait) anxiety of the patients. Our anesthetic technique was well defined a priori and consisted of only one variable (propofol dose), which was easily defined and measured. We also controlled for the surgical procedure and enrolled only healthy women undergoing laparoscopic tubal ligation with no history of effective disorders.

Several limitations concerning the design of our study must be addressed. First, the anesthetic technique used for patients in this study included N₂O, alfentanil, and propofol. Although the propofol infusion rate was changed based on the BIS value, the N₂O and alfentanil concentrations were administered in a fixed dose throughout the procedure. By using N₂O and alfentanil, we may have decreased the variability in the study population, and a greater difference among the groups might have been found if N₂O and alfentanil had not been added as a baseline anesthetic dose. Neither N₂O (26) nor alfentanil (27) have been reported to affect the BIS value significantly. Second, we responded to changes in the BIS value by changing the IV infusion rate of propofol. Although the propofol infusion titration technique has clinical relevance, this method does not assure that brain concentrations of propofol change as the IV infusion rates change. Measuring blood concentrations of propofol or using a target-control infusion system with a three-compartment pharmacokinetic model (28) would have been more appropriate for this study design.

In conclusion, we demonstrated that there is a moderate correlation between baseline anxiety and the amount of propofol required for the induction and maintenance of anesthesia. Thus, we suggest that the initial dose of induction drug administered by an anesthesiologist should be modified based on the anxiety level exhibited by the patient.

	Acknowledgments

 
Supported in part by the Patrick and Catherine Weldon Donaghue Foundation for Medical Research. Equipment was provided by Aspect Medical Systems.

We thank Paul G. Barash, MD, for his critical review of this manuscript.

	References

Top Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion References

 

1. Ramsay MAE. A survey of pre-operative fear. Anaesthesia 1972;27:396–402.[Web of Science][Medline]
2. Corman H, Hornick E, Kritchman M, Terestman N. Emotional reactions of surgical patients to hospitalization, anesthesia and surgery. Am J Surg 1958;96:646–53.[Web of Science][Medline]
3. Wallace LM. Psychological preparation as a method of reducing the stress of surgery. J Human Stress 1984;10:62–77.[Web of Science][Medline]
4. Czeisler CA, Ede MC, Regestein QR, et al. Episodic 24-hour cortisol secretory patterns in patients awaiting elective cardiac surgery. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1976;42:273–83.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5. Johnston M. Pre-operative emotional states and post-operative recovery. Psychosom Med 1986;15:1–22.
6. Wallace LM. Trait anxiety as a predictor of adjustment to and recovery from surgery. Br J Clin Psychol 1987;26:73–4.
7. Johnston M. Impending surgery. In: Fisher S, Reason J, eds. Handbook of life stress. New York:John Wiley & Sons, 1988:79–100.
8. Parris WC, Matt D, Jamison RN, Maxson W. Anxiety and postoperative recovery in ambulatory surgery patients. Prog 1988;35:61–4.
9. Williams JG, Jones JR, Williams B. A physiological measure of preoperative anxiety. Psychosom Med 1969;31:522–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Williams JGL, Jones JR, Workhoven MN, Williams B. The psychological control of preoperative anxiety. Psychophysiology 1975;12:50–4.[Web of Science][Medline]
11. Goldmann L, Ogg TW, Levey AB. Hypnosis and daycase anaesthesia: a study to reduce pre-operative anxiety and intra-operative anaesthetic requirements. Anaesthesia 1988;43:466–9.[Web of Science][Medline]
12. Rampil IJ. A primer for EEG signal processing in anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1998;89:980–1002.[Web of Science][Medline]
13. Sleigh JW, Andrzejowski J, Steyn-Ross A, Steyn-Ross M. The bispectral index: a measure of depth of sleep? Anesth Analg 1999;88:659–61.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Liu J, Singh H, White PF. Electroencephalographic bispectral index correlates with intraoperative recall and depth of propofol-induced sedation. Anesth Analg 1997;84:185–9.[Abstract]
15. Gan TJ, Glass PS, Windsor A, et al. Bispectral index monitoring allows faster emergence and improved recovery from propofol, alfentanil, and nitrous oxide anesthesia. BIS Utility Study Group. Anesthesiology 1997;87:808–15.[Web of Science][Medline]
16. Glass PS, Bloom M, Kearse L, et al. Bispectral analysis measures sedation and memory effects of propofol, midazolam, isoflurane, and alfentanil in healthy volunteers. Anesthesiology 1997;86:836–47.[Web of Science][Medline]
17. Spielberger CD. Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI: Form Y). Palo Alto, CA:Consulting Psychologists Press, 1983.
18. Miller S. Monitoring and blunting: validation of a questionnaire to assess styles of information seeking under threat. Soc Psychol 1987;52:345–53.
19. Miller SM. Monitoring versus blunting styles of coping with cancer influence the information patients want and need about their disease: implications for cancer screening and management. Cancer 1995;76:167–77.[Web of Science][Medline]
20. Hoffman WE, Zsigmond E, Albrecht RF. The bispectral index during induction of anesthesia with midazolam and propofol. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol 1996;8:15–20.[Web of Science][Medline]
21. Hug C. Does opioid anesthesia exist? Anesthesiology 1990;73:1–4.[Web of Science][Medline]
22. Vernon JM, Lang E, Sebel PS, Manberg P. Prediction of movement using bispectral electroencephalographic analysis during propofol/alfentanil or isoflurane/alfentanil anesthesia. Analg 1995;80:780–5.[Abstract]
23. Kearse LA Jr, Manberg P, Chamoun N, et al. Bispectral analysis of the electroencephalogram correlates with patient movement to skin incision during propofol/nitrous oxide anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1994;81:1365–70.[Web of Science][Medline]
24. Spielberger C. State-Trait Anxiety Inventory: a comprehensive bibliography. Palo Alto, CA:Mind Garden, 1989.
25. Moerman N, van Dam F, Muller M, Oosting H. The Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS). Anesth Analg 1996;82:445–51.[Abstract]
26. Rampil IJ, Kim JS, Lenhardt R, et al. Bispectral EEG index during nitrous oxide administration. Anesthesiology 1998;89:671–7.[Web of Science][Medline]
27. Iselin-Chaves IA, Flaishon R, Sebel PS, et al. The effect of the interaction of propofol and alfentanil on recall, loss of consciousness, and the Bispectral Index. Anesth Analg 1998;87:949–55.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Doi M, Gajraj RJ, Mantzaridis H, Kenny GN. Relationship between calculated blood concentration of propofol and electrophysiological variables during emergence from anaesthesia: comparison of bispectral index, spectral edge frequency, median frequency and auditory evoked potential index. Br J Anaesth 1997;78:180–4.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S.-M. Wang, S. Escalera, E. C. Lin, I. Maranets, and Z. N. Kain Extra-1 Acupressure for Children Undergoing Anesthesia Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2008; 107(3): 811 - 816. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. M. Varughese, T. G. Nick, J. Gunter, Y. Wang, and C. D. Kurth Factors Predictive of Poor Behavioral Compliance During Inhaled Induction in Children Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2008; 107(2): 413 - 421. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. H. Rosenberger, P. Jokl, and J. Ickovics Psychosocial factors and surgical outcomes: an evidence-based literature review. J. Am. Acad. Ortho. Surg., July 1, 2006; 14(7): 397 - 405. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Lee, P. T. Chui, and T. Gin Educating Patients About Anesthesia: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of Media-Based Interventions Anesth. Analg., May 1, 2003; 96(5): 1424 - 1431. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Fassoulaki, A. Paraskeva, K. Patris, T. Pourgiezi, and G. Kostopanagiotou Pressure Applied on the Extra 1 Acupuncture Point Reduces Bispectral Index Values and Stress in Volunteers Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2003; 96(3): 885 - 890. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. H. Y. Ng, B. Miao, and P. C. Ho Anxiolytic premedication reduces preoperative anxiety and pain during oocyte retrieval. A randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2002; 17(5): 1233 - 1238. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Zaugg, M. C. Schaub, T. Pasch, and D. R. Spahn Modulation of {beta}-adrenergic receptor subtype activities in perioperative medicine: mechanisms and sites of action Br. J. Anaesth., January 1, 2002; 88(1): 101 - 123. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. U. Adachi, K. Watanabe, H. Higuchi, and T. Satoh The Determinants of Propofol Induction of Anesthesia Dose Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2001; 92(3): 656 - 661. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Nagase, K. Ando-Nagase, Z. N. Kain, and I. Maranets Preoperative Anxiety and Intraoperative Anesthetic Requirements Response Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2000; 91(1): 250 - 250. [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (40) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Maranets, I. Articles by Kain, Z. N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Maranets, I. Articles by Kain, Z. N.

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