Recovery profile, costs, and patient satisfaction with propofol and sevoflurane for fast-track office-based anesthesia.
BACKGROUND
Office-based surgery is becoming increasingly popular because of its cost-saving potential Both propofol and sevoflurane are commonly used in the ambulatory setting because of their favorable recovery profiles. This clinical investigation was designed to compare the clinical effects, recovery characteristics, and cost-effectiveness of propofol and sevoflurane when used alone or in combination for office-based anesthesia.


METHODS
One hundred four outpatients undergoing superficial surgical procedures at an office-based surgical center were randomly assigned to one of three general anesthetic groups. In groups I and II, propofol 2 mg/kg was administered for induction followed by propofol 75-150 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) (group I) or sevoflurane 1-2% (group II) with N2O 67% in oxygen for maintenance of anesthesia In group m, anesthesia was induced and maintained with sevoflurane in combination with N2O 67% in oxygen. Local anesthetics were injected at the incision site before skin incision and during the surgical procedure. The recovery profiles, costs of drugs, and resources used, as well as patient satisfaction, were compared among the three treatment groups.


RESULTS
Although early recovery variables (e.g., eye opening, response to commands, and sitting up) were similar in all three groups, the times to standing up and to be "home ready" were significantly prolonged when sevoflurane-N2O was used for both induction and maintenance of anesthesia. The time to tolerating fluids, recovery room stay, and discharge times were significantly decreased when propofol was used for both induction and maintenance of anesthesia. Similarly, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and the need for rescue antiemetics were also significantly reduced after propofol anesthesia. Finally, the total costs and patient satisfaction were more favorable when propofol was used for induction and maintenance of office-based anesthesia


CONCLUSIONS
Compared with sevoflurane-N2O, use of propofol-N2O for office-based anesthesia was associated with an improved recovery profile, greater patient satisfaction, and lower costs. There were significantly more patients who were dissatisfied with the sevoflurane anesthetic technique.
Tang
J
J
Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas, 75235-9068, USA.
Chen
L
L
White
P F
PF
Watcha
M F
MF
Wender
R H
RH
Naruse
R
R
Kariger
R
R
Sloninsky
A
A
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000556:Ambulatory Surgical Procedures; D000758:Anesthesia / Q000191:economics*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008738:Methyl Ethers / Q000494:pharmacology*; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000517:prevention & control; D015742:Propofol / Q000494:pharmacology*; D000077149:Sevoflurane; D016037:Single-Blind Method
D008738:Methyl Ethers; D000077149:Sevoflurane; D015742:Propofol