Which anaesthetic agents and techniques are most cost-effective in day surgery?
| ISRCTN | ISRCTN87609400 |
|---|---|
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN87609400 |
| Protocol serial number | HTA 96/15/05 |
| Sponsor | Department of Health (UK) |
| Funder | NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme - HTA (UK) |
- Submission date
- 25/04/2003
- Registration date
- 25/04/2003
- Last edited
- 08/11/2022
- Recruitment status
- No longer recruiting
- Overall study status
- Completed
- Condition category
- Other
Prospectively registered
Protocol
Statistical analysis plan
Results
Individual participant data
Plain English summary of protocol
Not provided at time of registration
Contact information
Dr Rachel Elliott
Scientific
Scientific
Health Services Research Unit
Polwarth Building
Foresterhill
Aberdeen
AB25 2ZD
United Kingdom
| Phone | +44 (0)1224 553732 |
|---|---|
| c.glazener@abdn.ac.uk |
Study information
| Primary study design | Interventional |
|---|---|
| Study design | Randomised controlled trial |
| Secondary study design | Randomised controlled trial |
| Scientific title | Which anaesthetic agents and techniques are most cost-effective in day surgery? |
| Study objectives | Literature review, national survey and randomised controlled trial. This study uses a prospective randomised controlled trial design, to assess the relative cost effectiveness of inhalational and total intravenous anaesthesia, in day case surgery for adult and paediatric patients requiring general anaesthesia. The objectives are to: 1. Assess the relative clinical outcomes of principle anaesthetic methods used in adult and paediatric day surgery 2. Identify the resource use and associated costs incurred by the NHS during the anaesthetic and post anaesthetic period for principle anaesthetic methods 3. Determine patient acceptability of principal anaesthetic methods used 4. Use clinical, economic and humanistic data collected in this study to assess the relative cost effectiveness of principle anaesthetic methods used. |
| Ethics approval(s) | Not provided at time of registration |
| Health condition(s) or problem(s) studied | Not applicable |
| Intervention | The adult study has four arms (propofol then propofol; propofol then isoflurane/N2O propofol then sevoflurane then sevoflurane/N2O), 330 patients in each arm. The paediatric study has two arms (thiopentone [ages 3 to 6] or propofol [ages 7 to 10] then halothane/N2O; sevoflurane then hevoflurane/N2O [ages 3 to 10]), 220 patients in each arm. |
| Intervention type | Drug |
| Phase | Not Specified |
| Drug / device / biological / vaccine name(s) | propofol, isoflurane, sevoflurane, thiopentone, halothane |
| Primary outcome measure(s) |
Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) |
| Key secondary outcome measure(s) |
Not provided at time of registration |
| Completion date | 31/07/2001 |
Eligibility
| Participant type(s) | Patient |
|---|---|
| Age group | Other |
| Sex | All |
| Target sample size at registration | 1760 |
| Key inclusion criteria | Adult general, orthopaedic and gynaecology patients, and paediatric general and ear, nose and throat (ENT) patients. |
| Key exclusion criteria | Not provided at time of registration |
| Date of first enrolment | 01/03/1999 |
| Date of final enrolment | 31/07/2001 |
Locations
Countries of recruitment
- United Kingdom
- Scotland
Study participating centre
Health Services Research Unit
Aberdeen
AB25 2ZD
United Kingdom
AB25 2ZD
United Kingdom
Results and Publications
| Individual participant data (IPD) Intention to share | No |
|---|---|
| IPD sharing plan summary | Not provided at time of registration |
| IPD sharing plan | Not provided at time of registration |
Study outputs
| Output type | Details | Date created | Date added | Peer reviewed? | Patient-facing? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Results article | HTA monograph | 01/10/2002 | Yes | No |
Editorial Notes
08/11/2022: Internal review.
