Wagner B K, O'Hara D A
College of Pharmacy, Rutgers University, Piscataway, New Jersey, USA.
Clin Ther. 1995 Jul-Aug;17(4):770-6. doi: 10.1016/0149-2918(95)80053-0.
This study investigated the cost of propofol versus thiopental anesthesia in 243 patients who underwent outpatient laparoscopic gynecologic surgery. Patients records were analyzed for medication use, duration of surgery, anesthesia, recovery room stay, and associated costs. Despite the higher drug cost for propofol, the total mean cost was $273.00 less per patient for patients receiving propofol induction anesthesia. Extension of these data translates into cost savings of approximately $7900.00 if propofol had been used for all patients. Although the duration of surgery for the propofol group was shorter by nearly 12 minutes, the anesthesia duration and recovery room stay were both longer for the thiopental group, reflecting the longer duration of action of thiopental. Although the realized cost savings of drugs, surgery, anesthesia, and recovery time when propofol versus thiopental is used for outpatient laparoscopic gynecologic surgery are relatively small on an individual patient basis, cost savings may become more significant if larger patient populations are studied.
本研究调查了243例接受门诊腹腔镜妇科手术患者使用丙泊酚麻醉与硫喷妥钠麻醉的成本。分析患者记录,了解用药情况、手术时长、麻醉时长、在恢复室的停留时间及相关成本。尽管丙泊酚的药物成本较高,但接受丙泊酚诱导麻醉的患者人均总平均成本比使用硫喷妥钠麻醉的患者低273.00美元。如果所有患者均使用丙泊酚,这些数据的外推结果表明可节省约7900.00美元。虽然丙泊酚组的手术时长缩短了近12分钟,但硫喷妥钠组的麻醉时长和在恢复室的停留时间均更长,这反映了硫喷妥钠的作用时间更长。虽然在门诊腹腔镜妇科手术中,使用丙泊酚与硫喷妥钠相比,在药物、手术、麻醉和恢复时间方面实现的成本节省在个体患者层面相对较小,但如果研究更大的患者群体,成本节省可能会变得更加显著。