title: Is propofol cost-effective for day-surgery patients?
abstract: To attempt to justify the expense of using propofol for day-surgery, we have compared propofol with methohexitone for induction of anaesthesia for elective minor gynaecological procedures. Seventy healthy patients were randomised to receive either induction agent and postoperatively they were compared for recovery times, side-effects and patient appraisal the following day. The results showed that propofol was superior to methohexitone for most parameters, with small but statistically significant differences in response time, ambulation time, vomiting and drowsiness during recovery. There were minor differences in patient appraisal the next day. However, it is doubtful whether the advantages of propofol are sufficiently substantial to justify the expense of its routine use in preference to methohexitone and its place is a matter for individual judgement.
authors.affiliation: Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Cade
authors.forename: P T
authors.initials: PT
authors.lastname: Morley
authors.forename: A W
authors.initials: AW
authors.lastname: Ross
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000556:Ambulatory Surgical Procedures / Q000191:economics*; D000771:Anesthesia, Intravenous / Q000191:economics*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008723:Methohexital; D015742:Propofol
chemical_list: D008723:Methohexital; D015742:Propofol