Meyer-McCright A, Hofer R E, Tarhan S
McDonough District Hospital, Macomb, Illinois, USA.
AANA J. 1998 Aug;66(4):385-9.
This retrospective study was designed to compare the cost of anesthesia in three different groups of patients who received general anesthesia for a diagnostic dilatation and curettage procedure. The analysis included 194 patients, ASA physical status I, II, or III. All patients were outpatients with similar body mass index and age. The three groups were thiopental/isoflurane (n = 13), propofol/isoflurane (n = 126), and propofol/desflurane (n = 55). Anesthesia drugs, volatile agents, personnel costs, and type of providers were included in the cost comparison. The cost of supplies, inhalation agents, and drugs for the thiopental/isoflurane group were significantly different (P < .001) than the other two groups. The mean +/- SD thiopental/isoflurane combination was $7.00 +/- $2.74, whereas, the mean +/- SD cost of the propofol/isoflurane and propofol/desflurane groups was $12.73 +/- $3.57 and $14.40 +/- $5.05, respectively. The mean +/- SD cost of all three anesthetic drugs/volatile agents/endotracheal tube groups was $12.85 +/- $4.35. No statistically significant differences between the three groups were found in postanesthesia care unit (PACU) drug costs, anesthesia personnel cost, total direct anesthesia costs, or length of stay. The incidence of antiemetic administration intraoperatively and in PACU was significantly different (P < .001) between the thiopental/isoflurane group and the other groups. The thiopental/isoflurane group did not receive any antiemetics in either area, whereas the propofol groups received antiemetics 12.7% of the time. The three anesthesia providers, Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists, student registered nurse anesthetists (SRNA), and anesthesia residents were reviewed looking at anesthesia supply cost, personnel cost, and total direct anesthesia costs. No statistically significant differences were found between the groups. We conclude that an anesthetic using thiopental/isoflurane is more cost-effective than propofol/desflurane or propofol/isoflurane anesthetics and the postoperative length of stay is no different for the three anesthetic approaches.
本回顾性研究旨在比较三组接受诊断性刮宫术全身麻醉的患者的麻醉费用。分析纳入了194例ASA身体状况为I、II或III级的患者。所有患者均为门诊患者,体重指数和年龄相近。三组分别为硫喷妥钠/异氟烷组(n = 13)、丙泊酚/异氟烷组(n = 126)和丙泊酚/地氟烷组(n = 55)。成本比较包括麻醉药物、挥发性麻醉剂、人员成本和提供者类型。硫喷妥钠/异氟烷组的耗材、吸入麻醉剂和药物成本与其他两组有显著差异(P <.001)。硫喷妥钠/异氟烷组合的平均成本±标准差为7.00美元±2.74美元,而丙泊酚/异氟烷组和丙泊酚/地氟烷组的平均成本±标准差分别为12.73美元±3.57美元和14.40美元±5.05美元。所有三种麻醉药物/挥发性麻醉剂/气管导管组的平均成本±标准差为12.85美元±4.35美元。三组在麻醉后护理单元(PACU)药物成本、麻醉人员成本、总直接麻醉成本或住院时间方面未发现统计学上的显著差异。硫喷妥钠/异氟烷组与其他组在术中及PACU使用止吐药的发生率有显著差异(P <.001)。硫喷妥钠/异氟烷组在这两个区域均未使用任何止吐药,而丙泊酚组使用止吐药的时间为12.7%。对三名麻醉提供者,即注册护士麻醉师、学生注册护士麻醉师(SRNA)和麻醉住院医师进行了审查,比较了麻醉耗材成本、人员成本和总直接麻醉成本。各组之间未发现统计学上的显著差异。我们得出结论,使用硫喷妥钠/异氟烷的麻醉比丙泊酚/地氟烷或丙泊酚/异氟烷麻醉更具成本效益,并且三种麻醉方法的术后住院时间没有差异。