AIRR - ANZCA Institutional Research Repository
Skip navigation
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11055/859
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMcGain F,en_US
dc.contributor.authorBishop JR,en_US
dc.contributor.authorElliot-Jones LM,en_US
dc.contributor.authorStory DA,en_US
dc.contributor.authorImberger GLen_US
dc.date2019-05-15-
dc.date.accessioned2019-06-12T00:52:17Z-
dc.date.available2019-06-12T00:52:17Z-
dc.identifier.citationAnaesth Intensive Care. 2019 May 15:310057X19836104en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11055/859-
dc.description.abstractStrategies to reduce the adverse environmental costs of anaesthesia include choice of agent and fresh gas flows. The current preferences of Australian and New Zealand anaesthetists are unknown. We conducted a survey of Australian and New Zealand anaesthetists to determine the use of volatiles, nitrous oxide and intravenous anaesthesia, lowest fresh gas flow rates, automated end-tidal volatile control, and the rationales for these choices. The survey was answered by 359/1000 (36%), although not all questions and multiple responses within single questions were answered by all respondents. Sevoflurane was preferred by 246/342 (72%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 67%-77%), followed by propofol, 54/340 (16%, 95% CI 12%-20%), desflurane 39/339 (12%, 95% CI 8%-16%) and isoflurane 3/338(1%, 95% CI 0-3%). When asked about all anaesthetics, low-risk clinical profile was the most common reason given for using sevoflurane (129/301 (43%, 95% CI 37%-49%)), reduced postoperative nausea for propofol (297/318 (93%, 95% CI 90%-96%)) and faster induction/awakening times for desflurane (46/313 (79%, 95% CI 74%-83%)). Two-thirds (226/340 (66%, 95% CI 61%-71%)) of respondents used nitrous oxide in 0-20% of general anaesthetics. Low fresh gas flow rates for sevoflurane were used by 310/333 (93%, 95% CI 90%-95%) and for 262/268 (98%, 95% CI 95%-99%) for desflurane. Automated end-tidal control was used by 196/333 (59%, 95% CI 53%-64%). The majority of respondents (>70%) preferred sevoflurane at low flows. These data allow anaesthetists to consider further whether changes are required to the choices of anaesthetic agents for environmental, financial, or any other reasons.en_US
dc.subjectSurveyen_US
dc.subjectenvironmenten_US
dc.subjectfinancial savingsen_US
dc.subjectgeneral Anaesthesiaen_US
dc.subjectnitrous oxideen_US
dc.subjectpropofolen_US
dc.subjectvolatilesen_US
dc.titleA survey of the choice of general anaesthetic agents in Australia and New Zealand.en_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.type.contentTexten_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleAnaesth Intensive Careen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/0310057X19836104en_US
dc.description.affiliatesWestern Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesAustin Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesWestern Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australiaen_US
dc.description.pubmedurihttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=A+survey+of+the+choice+of+general+anaesthetic+agents+in+Australia+and+New+Zealand.en_US
dc.type.studyortrialClinical Trialen_US
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
Appears in Collections:Scholarly and Clinical
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.