Search

Proper economic evaluation involves comparative analysis of alternative courses of action in terms of both costs and outcome. This is difficult for general anaesthesia as there are few alternatives and measurement of outcome is difficult to define. All that is generally available is a cost description of different anaesthetic techniques. This article outlines the choice of drugs, breathing systems and ventilatory pattern available to the anaesthetist, and compares regional with general anaesthesia. For each technique the cost and advantages/disadvantages are outlined. There is a discussion of some wider issues involved together with their implications: the abandonment of cyclopropane and nitrous oxide; equipment costs and recommendations by the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland; staffing levels; legal aspects and the increase in day surgery. The limitation of cost-effectiveness analysis of general anaesthesia is outlined.

The findings of a comparative study of cost awareness amongst particular groups of health service staff are reported. The study is a repeat of that undertaken in 1987 by Fairbrass and Chaffe. The findings are compared to assess how awareness of the cost of anaesthetic drugs, fluids and disposables has changed as a result of the publicity since 1987. Without prior warning, the study group were asked to estimate the cost of twenty-eight items. The results show that their degree of accuracy remains poor. Overall the tendency was to overestimate costs, whilst a small number of expensive items such as volatile agents were consistently underpriced. The results show that, over the last three years, there has been no significant change in the knowledge of cost awareness. At a time when the effective use of scarce resources is being emphasised, a staff programme of continuing cost awareness training is recommended.