Literature DB >> 27973936

Recovery Profile and Patient Satisfaction After Ambulatory Anesthesia for Dental Treatment-A Crossover Comparison Between Propofol and Sevoflurane.

Keita Ohkushi1, Ken-Ichi Fukuda2, Yoshihiko Koukita3, Yuzuru Kaneko3, Tatsuya Ichinohe4.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine which anesthetic was preferable for ambulatory anesthesia: propofol alone or sevoflurane alone. A crossover study was performed to compare the recovery profile and patient satisfaction after 2 anesthesia methods. Twenty healthy patients with severe anxiety toward dental treatment undergoing 2 sessions of day-case dental treatment received either propofol or sevoflurane anesthesia. The order of these methods was randomized. The depths of anesthesia were kept constant using bispectral index (BIS) monitoring. Observations on recovery profiles were performed in the emergence phase, in the recovery phase, and 24 hours after discharge. Patient satisfaction and preference were obtained by a questionnaire. Most of the recovery profiles in the emergence phase such as time to eye opening to respond to verbal command, time to BIS ≥ 75, and time to extubation were shorter in the sevoflurane group than in the propofol group. All recovery profiles in the recovery phase showed no differences between the 2 groups. Based on the subject's satisfaction and preference, propofol was evaluated as a better anesthetic for ambulatory anesthesia than sevoflurane. Higher patient satisfaction and a greater preference for future dental treatment were revealed for propofol anesthesia. Propofol may be more suitable for ambulatory anesthesia for dental treatment.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ambulatory anesthesia; Patient satisfaction; Propofol; Recovery profile; Sevoflurane

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27973936      PMCID: PMC5157142          DOI: 10.2344/15-00012.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Prog        ISSN: 0003-3006


  20 in total

1.  Context-sensitive half-time in multicompartment pharmacokinetic models for intravenous anesthetic drugs.

Authors:  M A Hughes; P S Glass; J R Jacobs
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 7.892

2.  Recovery of cognitive function after remifentanil-propofol anesthesia: a comparison with desflurane and sevoflurane anesthesia.

Authors:  B Larsen; A Seitz; R Larsen
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 5.108

3.  Clinical comparison of remifentanil-sevoflurane vs. remifentanil-propofol for endoscopic endonasal transphenoidal surgery.

Authors:  T Cafiero; L M Cavallo; A Frangiosa; R Burrelli; G Gargiulo; P Cappabianca; E de Divitiis
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  2007-03-12       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  The post-anesthesia recovery score revisited.

Authors:  J A Aldrete
Journal:  J Clin Anesth       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 9.452

5.  Recovery profile, costs, and patient satisfaction with propofol and sevoflurane for fast-track office-based anesthesia.

Authors:  J Tang; L Chen; P F White; M F Watcha; R H Wender; R Naruse; R Kariger; A Sloninsky
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 7.892

6.  Recovery after anesthesia with remifentanil combined with propofol, desflurane, or sevoflurane for otorhinolaryngeal surgery.

Authors:  T Loop; H J Priebe
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 5.108

7.  A review of recovery from sevoflurane anaesthesia: comparisons with isoflurane and propofol including meta-analysis.

Authors:  B J Robinson; T D Uhrich; T J Ebert
Journal:  Acta Anaesthesiol Scand       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 2.105

8.  Comparison of total intravenous anesthesia and sevoflurane-fentanyl anesthesia for outpatient otorhinolaryngeal surgery.

Authors:  Félix R Montes; Julio E Trillos; Ismael E Rincón; Juan C Giraldo; José D Rincón; María V Vanegas; Hernán Charris
Journal:  J Clin Anesth       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 9.452

9.  Cost-effectiveness and high patient satisfaction in the elderly: sevoflurane versus propofol anaesthesia.

Authors:  S P Luntz; E Janitz; J Motsch; A Bach; E Martin; B W Böttiger
Journal:  Eur J Anaesthesiol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.330

10.  Comparison between sevoflurane/remifentanil and propofol/remifentanil anaesthesia in providing conditions for somatosensory evoked potential monitoring during scoliosis corrective surgery.

Authors:  N Y Fung; Y Hu; M G Irwin; B E M Chow; M Y Yuen
Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 1.669

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.