Cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring

A prospective, randomized controlled trial

Timea Bocskai, Csaba Loibl, Zoltan Vamos, Gabor Woth, Tihamer Molnar, L. Bogár, Laszlo Lujber

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: We compared cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring, in the clinical setting of ear-nose-throat surgery. Methods: One hundred twenty adult patients were randomized to four groups. In groups SEVO and SEVO+ anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane, in group SEVO+ with additional bispectral index (BIS) and train-of-four (TOF) monitoring. In groups PROP and PROP+ anesthesia was maintained with propofol, in group PROP+ with additional BIS and TOF monitoring. Results: Total cost of anesthesia per hour was greater in group SEVO+ compared to SEVO [€ 19.95(8.53) vs. 12.15(5.32), p < 0.001], and in group PROP+ compared to PROP (€ 22.11(8.08) vs. 13.23(4.23), p < 0.001]. Time to extubation was shorter in group SEVO+ compared to SEVO [11.1(4.7) vs. 14.5(3.9) min, p = 0.002], and in PROP+ compared to PROP [12.6(5.4) vs. 15.2(4.7) min, p < 0.001]. Postoperatively, arterial blood pressure returned to its initial values sooner in groups SEVO+ and PROP+. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that the use of BIS and TOF monitoring decreased the total cost of anesthesia drugs and hastened postoperative recovery. However, in our circumstances, these were associated with higher disposables costs. Detailed cost analysis and further investigations are needed to identify patient populations who would benefit most from additional monitoring.

Original languageEnglish
Article number100
JournalBMC Anesthesiology
Volume18
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 28 2018

Fingerprint

Propofol
Neuromuscular Monitoring
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Anesthesia
Randomized Controlled Trials
Costs and Cost Analysis
Drug Costs
Pharynx
Nose
Ear
Arterial Pressure
sevoflurane
Population

Keywords

  • Anesthesia
  • Bispectral index
  • Cost
  • Patient safety
  • Train-of-four

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

Cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring : A prospective, randomized controlled trial. / Bocskai, Timea; Loibl, Csaba; Vamos, Zoltan; Woth, Gabor; Molnar, Tihamer; Bogár, L.; Lujber, Laszlo.

In: BMC Anesthesiology, Vol. 18, No. 1, 100, 28.07.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bocskai, Timea ; Loibl, Csaba ; Vamos, Zoltan ; Woth, Gabor ; Molnar, Tihamer ; Bogár, L. ; Lujber, Laszlo. / Cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring : A prospective, randomized controlled trial. In: BMC Anesthesiology. 2018 ; Vol. 18, No. 1.
@article{16fe589a9d7b43d2b0590884251e2b72,
title = "Cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring: A prospective, randomized controlled trial",
abstract = "Background: We compared cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring, in the clinical setting of ear-nose-throat surgery. Methods: One hundred twenty adult patients were randomized to four groups. In groups SEVO and SEVO+ anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane, in group SEVO+ with additional bispectral index (BIS) and train-of-four (TOF) monitoring. In groups PROP and PROP+ anesthesia was maintained with propofol, in group PROP+ with additional BIS and TOF monitoring. Results: Total cost of anesthesia per hour was greater in group SEVO+ compared to SEVO [€ 19.95(8.53) vs. 12.15(5.32), p < 0.001], and in group PROP+ compared to PROP (€ 22.11(8.08) vs. 13.23(4.23), p < 0.001]. Time to extubation was shorter in group SEVO+ compared to SEVO [11.1(4.7) vs. 14.5(3.9) min, p = 0.002], and in PROP+ compared to PROP [12.6(5.4) vs. 15.2(4.7) min, p < 0.001]. Postoperatively, arterial blood pressure returned to its initial values sooner in groups SEVO+ and PROP+. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that the use of BIS and TOF monitoring decreased the total cost of anesthesia drugs and hastened postoperative recovery. However, in our circumstances, these were associated with higher disposables costs. Detailed cost analysis and further investigations are needed to identify patient populations who would benefit most from additional monitoring.",
keywords = "Anesthesia, Bispectral index, Cost, Patient safety, Train-of-four",
author = "Timea Bocskai and Csaba Loibl and Zoltan Vamos and Gabor Woth and Tihamer Molnar and L. Bog{\'a}r and Laszlo Lujber",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "28",
doi = "10.1186/s12871-018-0563-z",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
journal = "BMC Anesthesiology",
issn = "1471-2253",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring

T2 - A prospective, randomized controlled trial

AU - Bocskai, Timea

AU - Loibl, Csaba

AU - Vamos, Zoltan

AU - Woth, Gabor

AU - Molnar, Tihamer

AU - Bogár, L.

AU - Lujber, Laszlo

PY - 2018/7/28

Y1 - 2018/7/28

N2 - Background: We compared cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring, in the clinical setting of ear-nose-throat surgery. Methods: One hundred twenty adult patients were randomized to four groups. In groups SEVO and SEVO+ anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane, in group SEVO+ with additional bispectral index (BIS) and train-of-four (TOF) monitoring. In groups PROP and PROP+ anesthesia was maintained with propofol, in group PROP+ with additional BIS and TOF monitoring. Results: Total cost of anesthesia per hour was greater in group SEVO+ compared to SEVO [€ 19.95(8.53) vs. 12.15(5.32), p < 0.001], and in group PROP+ compared to PROP (€ 22.11(8.08) vs. 13.23(4.23), p < 0.001]. Time to extubation was shorter in group SEVO+ compared to SEVO [11.1(4.7) vs. 14.5(3.9) min, p = 0.002], and in PROP+ compared to PROP [12.6(5.4) vs. 15.2(4.7) min, p < 0.001]. Postoperatively, arterial blood pressure returned to its initial values sooner in groups SEVO+ and PROP+. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that the use of BIS and TOF monitoring decreased the total cost of anesthesia drugs and hastened postoperative recovery. However, in our circumstances, these were associated with higher disposables costs. Detailed cost analysis and further investigations are needed to identify patient populations who would benefit most from additional monitoring.

AB - Background: We compared cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring, in the clinical setting of ear-nose-throat surgery. Methods: One hundred twenty adult patients were randomized to four groups. In groups SEVO and SEVO+ anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane, in group SEVO+ with additional bispectral index (BIS) and train-of-four (TOF) monitoring. In groups PROP and PROP+ anesthesia was maintained with propofol, in group PROP+ with additional BIS and TOF monitoring. Results: Total cost of anesthesia per hour was greater in group SEVO+ compared to SEVO [€ 19.95(8.53) vs. 12.15(5.32), p < 0.001], and in group PROP+ compared to PROP (€ 22.11(8.08) vs. 13.23(4.23), p < 0.001]. Time to extubation was shorter in group SEVO+ compared to SEVO [11.1(4.7) vs. 14.5(3.9) min, p = 0.002], and in PROP+ compared to PROP [12.6(5.4) vs. 15.2(4.7) min, p < 0.001]. Postoperatively, arterial blood pressure returned to its initial values sooner in groups SEVO+ and PROP+. Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that the use of BIS and TOF monitoring decreased the total cost of anesthesia drugs and hastened postoperative recovery. However, in our circumstances, these were associated with higher disposables costs. Detailed cost analysis and further investigations are needed to identify patient populations who would benefit most from additional monitoring.

KW - Anesthesia

KW - Bispectral index

KW - Cost

KW - Patient safety

KW - Train-of-four

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85050649891&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85050649891&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12871-018-0563-z

DO - 10.1186/s12871-018-0563-z

M3 - Article

VL - 18

JO - BMC Anesthesiology

JF - BMC Anesthesiology

SN - 1471-2253

IS - 1

M1 - 100

ER -