Comparison of recovery of propofol and methohexital sedation using an infusion pump.

M. Cohen, S. Eisig, Richard A. Kraut

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Two sedative anesthetic agents administered by an infusion pump were compared during third molar surgery. Forty American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class I or II volunteers were randomly allocated to two groups. All subjects received supplemental oxygen via a nasal hood, fentanyl (0.0007 mg/kg intravenous [i.v.] bolus), and midazolam (1 mg/2 min) titrated to effect. Patients then received either 0.3 mg/kg of methohexital or 0.5 mg/kg of propofol via an infusion pump. Upon completion of the bolus, a continuous infusion of 0.05 mg/kg/min methohexital or 0.066 mg/kg/min propofol was administered throughout the procedure. Hemo-dynamic and respiratory parameters and psychomotor performance were compared for the two groups and no significant differences were found. The continuous infusion method maintained a steady level of sedation. Patients receiving propofol had a smoother sedation as judged by the surgeon and anesthetist.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)9-13
Number of pages5
JournalAnesthesia Progress
Volume43
Issue number1
StatePublished - Dec 1996

Fingerprint

Methohexital
Infusion Pumps
Propofol
Psychomotor Performance
Third Molar
Midazolam
Fentanyl
Hypnotics and Sedatives
Nose
Anesthetics
Volunteers
Oxygen

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

Comparison of recovery of propofol and methohexital sedation using an infusion pump. / Cohen, M.; Eisig, S.; Kraut, Richard A.

In: Anesthesia Progress, Vol. 43, No. 1, 12.1996, p. 9-13.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{410bbb93607444e8a08957824611fbd2,
title = "Comparison of recovery of propofol and methohexital sedation using an infusion pump.",
abstract = "Two sedative anesthetic agents administered by an infusion pump were compared during third molar surgery. Forty American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class I or II volunteers were randomly allocated to two groups. All subjects received supplemental oxygen via a nasal hood, fentanyl (0.0007 mg/kg intravenous [i.v.] bolus), and midazolam (1 mg/2 min) titrated to effect. Patients then received either 0.3 mg/kg of methohexital or 0.5 mg/kg of propofol via an infusion pump. Upon completion of the bolus, a continuous infusion of 0.05 mg/kg/min methohexital or 0.066 mg/kg/min propofol was administered throughout the procedure. Hemo-dynamic and respiratory parameters and psychomotor performance were compared for the two groups and no significant differences were found. The continuous infusion method maintained a steady level of sedation. Patients receiving propofol had a smoother sedation as judged by the surgeon and anesthetist.",
author = "M. Cohen and S. Eisig and Kraut, {Richard A.}",
year = "1996",
month = "12",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "9--13",
journal = "Anesthesia Progress",
issn = "0003-3006",
publisher = "Allen Press Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of recovery of propofol and methohexital sedation using an infusion pump.

AU - Cohen, M.

AU - Eisig, S.

AU - Kraut, Richard A.

PY - 1996/12

Y1 - 1996/12

N2 - Two sedative anesthetic agents administered by an infusion pump were compared during third molar surgery. Forty American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class I or II volunteers were randomly allocated to two groups. All subjects received supplemental oxygen via a nasal hood, fentanyl (0.0007 mg/kg intravenous [i.v.] bolus), and midazolam (1 mg/2 min) titrated to effect. Patients then received either 0.3 mg/kg of methohexital or 0.5 mg/kg of propofol via an infusion pump. Upon completion of the bolus, a continuous infusion of 0.05 mg/kg/min methohexital or 0.066 mg/kg/min propofol was administered throughout the procedure. Hemo-dynamic and respiratory parameters and psychomotor performance were compared for the two groups and no significant differences were found. The continuous infusion method maintained a steady level of sedation. Patients receiving propofol had a smoother sedation as judged by the surgeon and anesthetist.

AB - Two sedative anesthetic agents administered by an infusion pump were compared during third molar surgery. Forty American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class I or II volunteers were randomly allocated to two groups. All subjects received supplemental oxygen via a nasal hood, fentanyl (0.0007 mg/kg intravenous [i.v.] bolus), and midazolam (1 mg/2 min) titrated to effect. Patients then received either 0.3 mg/kg of methohexital or 0.5 mg/kg of propofol via an infusion pump. Upon completion of the bolus, a continuous infusion of 0.05 mg/kg/min methohexital or 0.066 mg/kg/min propofol was administered throughout the procedure. Hemo-dynamic and respiratory parameters and psychomotor performance were compared for the two groups and no significant differences were found. The continuous infusion method maintained a steady level of sedation. Patients receiving propofol had a smoother sedation as judged by the surgeon and anesthetist.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030308205&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030308205&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 43

SP - 9

EP - 13

JO - Anesthesia Progress

JF - Anesthesia Progress

SN - 0003-3006

IS - 1

ER -