1988
DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.1988.tb02683.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of costs of different anaesthetic techniques

Abstract: The costs of anaesthetic drugs, intravenous agents as well as gases, were studied for different anaesthetic techniques in a medium-sized operative procedure, cholecystectomy. Three anaesthetic breathing systems were used: a non-rebreathing system, a circle absorber system with medium fresh gas flows of 3-6 l/min, and a low-flow circle system. Anaesthesia without volatile inhalation agents used with a low-flow technique was the least expensive, and anaesthesia with isoflurane in a non-rebreathing system was the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0
3

Year Published

1992
1992
1999
1999

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
1
8
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Barton & Nunn (6) found a reduction in consumption of halothane in the same magnitude as in our study when comparing closed circuit anaesthesia with high FGF in a Magill circuit ( 7 1.min-I). I n a retrospective study based on anaesthetic charts, Bengtson et al (7), in 1988, compared the cost of different anaesthetic techniques. With respect to isoflurane-nitrous oxide anaesthesia, the saving using a low FGF in a circle system (approximately 0.5 1 * min-l) compared with a high FGF using a non-rebreathing system (FGF 9-13 1. min-') was 54% in their study (68% in our study).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Barton & Nunn (6) found a reduction in consumption of halothane in the same magnitude as in our study when comparing closed circuit anaesthesia with high FGF in a Magill circuit ( 7 1.min-I). I n a retrospective study based on anaesthetic charts, Bengtson et al (7), in 1988, compared the cost of different anaesthetic techniques. With respect to isoflurane-nitrous oxide anaesthesia, the saving using a low FGF in a circle system (approximately 0.5 1 * min-l) compared with a high FGF using a non-rebreathing system (FGF 9-13 1. min-') was 54% in their study (68% in our study).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They are related to the duration of the anesthetic procedure, the price of the anesthetic agent, and the extent of flow reduction [42][43][44]. If a high-flow (4.5 l·min Ϫ1 ) technique is companed with a minimal-flow (0.5 l·min Ϫ1 ) technique lasting 2 h, assuming the inspired anesthetic concentration at MAC, savings of about US$ 15 can be achieved if enflurane is used, about US$ 21 if isoflurane is used, and about US$ 47 if desflurane is used [16].…”
Section: Advantages Of Low-flow Anesthesiamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are several advantages in using circle anaesthesia systems and low fresh gas flows in the delivery of inhalational anaesthesia, among them economy and preservation of airway humidity ( 1,2). Many departments have, however, made substantial investments in anaesthesia ventilators that cannot be directly attached to a circle system.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%