Suppr超能文献

三种不同全身麻醉技术用于择期膝关节镜检查的成本比较

Cost comparison between three different general anaesthetic techniques for elective arthroscopy of the knee.

作者信息

Heidvall M, Hein A, Davidson S, Jakobsson J

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics and Anaesthesia, Sabbatsberg Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.

出版信息

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2000 Feb;44(2):157-62. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-6576.2000.440205.x.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

We compared three anaesthetic techniques for elective knee arthroscopy with special reference to cost-effectiveness.

METHOD

Seventy-five ASA I-II patients having elective arthroscopy of the knee joint were randomised to receive an anaesthetic technique based on propofol, fentanyl for induction followed by sevoflurane in oxygen:nitrous oxide (1:2 l/min) for maintenance of one of two intravenous techniques: propofol alfentanil or propofol-remifentanil infusions in combination with oxygen in air.

RESULTS

All patients had an uncomplicated course. No differences were seen with regard to emergence, postoperative pain or emesis or time to discharge. The anaesthetic technique based on sevoflurane was associated with the lowest cost US$ 14.7 as compared to US$ 18 for the propfol/alfentanil and US$ 19.9 for the propofol/remifentanil technique, including both cost for wastage as well as premedication and other fixed drug costs. Looking only at the anaesthetic drugs consumed, the cost per minute was US$ 0.56 for sevoflurane/nitrous oxide as compared to US$ 0.68 and 0.63 per minute for the propofol/alfentanil and proprofol/remifentanil, respectively. When the cost for wastage was taken into account, the difference in mean anaesthetic drug cost was more pronounced: the sevoflurane anaesthetic technique US$ 0.58, the propofol/alfentanil US$ 0.74 and the propofol/remifentanil US$ 0.84 per minute respectively.

CONCLUSION

From a cost-minimisation point of view, anaesthesia based on sevoflurane in oxygen:nitrous oxide is the technique of choice.

摘要

引言

我们比较了三种用于择期膝关节镜检查的麻醉技术,并特别参考了成本效益。

方法

75例美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级为I-II级的择期膝关节镜检查患者被随机分配接受基于丙泊酚、芬太尼诱导的麻醉技术,随后在氧气:氧化亚氮(1:2升/分钟)中使用七氟醚维持麻醉,采用两种静脉技术之一:丙泊酚+阿芬太尼或丙泊酚+瑞芬太尼输注并联合空气中的氧气。

结果

所有患者病程均无并发症。在苏醒、术后疼痛、呕吐或出院时间方面未见差异。与丙泊酚/阿芬太尼技术的18美元和丙泊酚/瑞芬太尼技术的19.9美元相比,基于七氟醚的麻醉技术成本最低,为14.7美元,包括浪费成本以及术前用药和其他固定药物成本。仅看消耗的麻醉药物,七氟醚/氧化亚氮每分钟成本为0.56美元,而丙泊酚/阿芬太尼和丙泊酚/瑞芬太尼分别为每分钟0.68美元和0.63美元。当考虑浪费成本时,平均麻醉药物成本差异更为明显:七氟醚麻醉技术分别为每分钟0.58美元、丙泊酚/阿芬太尼为0.74美元、丙泊酚/瑞芬太尼为0.84美元。

结论

从成本最小化的角度来看,氧气:氧化亚氮中基于七氟醚的麻醉是首选技术。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验