Search

Background: Pharmacological treatments for critical processes in patients need to be initiated as rapidly as possible; for this reason, it is a standard of care to prepare the main anesthesia and emergency drugs in advance. As a result, 20%-50% of the prepared drugs remain unused and are then discarded. Decreasing waste by optimizing drug use is an attractive strategy for meeting both cost containment and environmental sustainability. The primary end point of this study was to measure the actual amount of drug wastage in the operating rooms (ORs) and intensive care units (ICUs) of a Regional Health Service (RHS). The secondary end point was to analyze and estimate the economic implications of this waste for the Health Service and to suggest possible measures to reduce it., Methods: This prospective observational multicenter study was conducted across 12 hospitals, all of which belong to the same RHS in the north-east of Italy. Data collection took place in March 2018 and included patients admitted to ICUs, emergency areas, and ORs of the participating hospitals. Data concerning drug preparation and administration were collected for all consecutive patients, independent of case types and of whether operations were scheduled or unscheduled. Drug wastage was defined as follows: drugs prepared in ready-to-use syringes but not administered at all and discarded untouched. We then estimated the costs of wasted drugs for a 1-year period using the data from this study and the yearly regional pharmacy orders of drugs provided to the ORs and ICUs. We also performed a sensitivity analysis to validate the robustness of our assumptions and qualitative conclusions., Results: We collected data for a total of 13,078 prepared drug syringes. Drug wastage varied from 7.8% (Urapidil, an alpha-1 antagonist antihypertensive) to 85.7% (epinephrine) of prepared syringes, with an overall mean wastage rate of 38%. The estimated yearly waste was 139,531 syringes, for a total estimated financial cost of €78,060 ($92,569), and an additional quantity of medical waste amounting to 4968 kg per year. The total provider time dedicated to the preparation of unused drugs was predicted to be 1512 working hours per year., Conclusions: The overall extent of drug wastage in ORs and ICUs is concerning. Interventions aimed at minimizing waste-related costs and improving the environmental sustainability of our practice are paramount. Effort should be put into designing a more efficient workflow that reduces this waste while providing for the emergency availability of these medications in the OR and ICU., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Aim: To evaluate the effect of implementation of a hysterectomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol on perioperative anesthetic medication costs. Patients & methods: Historical cohort study of 84 adult patients who underwent a hysterectomy. Forty-two patients who underwent surgery before protocol implementation comprised the pre-ERAS group. Forty-two patients who underwent surgery after protocol implementation comprised the post-ERAS group. Data on anesthetic medication costs and outcomes were analyzed. Results: Compared with the pre-ERAS group, the post-ERAS group's total medication cost was significantly lower (median: 325.20 USD; interquartile range [IQR]: 256.12-430.65 USD vs median: 273.10 USD; IQR: 220.63-370.59 USD, median difference: -40.76, 95% CI: -130.39, 16.99, p = 0.047). Length of stay was significantly longer in pre-ERAS when compared with post-ERAS groups (median: 5.0 days; IQR: 4.0-7.0 days vs median: 3.0 days; IQR: 3.0-4.0 days, median difference: -2.0 days, 95% CI: -2.5581, -1.4419, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: ERAS protocols may reduce perioperative medication costs.

Background: Common treatments for chronic migraine headaches include injection of corticosteroid and anesthetic agents at local trigger sites. However, the effects of therapy are short term, and lifelong treatment is often necessary. In contrast, surgical decompression of migraine trigger sites accomplishes the same goal yet demonstrates successful long-term elimination of chronic migraines., Objectives: Our primary objective was to perform a cost-utility analysis to determine which patients would benefit most from available treatment options in a cost-conscious model., Methods: A cost-utility analysis was performed, taking into consideration costs, probabilities, and health state utility scores of various interventions., Results: Injection therapy offered a minor improvement in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with surgical decompression (QALY Δ = 0.6). However, long-term injection therapy was significantly costlier to society than surgical decompression: injection treatment was estimated to cost $106,887.96 more than surgery. The results of our cost-utility analysis thus conferred a positive incremental cost-utility ratio of $178,163.27 in favor of surgical decompression., Conclusions: Surgery provides a durable intervention and has been shown in this study to be extremely cost effective despite a very minor QALY deficit compared with injection therapy. If patients are identified who require treatment in the form of injections for less than 8.25 years, they may fall into a group that should not be offered surgery., (© 2019 The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc. Reprints and permission: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

The safety of anesthesia characteristic of high-income countries today is not matched in low-resource settings with poor infrastructure, shortages of anesthesia providers, essential drugs, equipment, and supplies. Health care is delivered through complex systems. Achieving sustainable widespread improvement globally will require an understanding of how to influence such systems. Health outcomes depend not only on a country's income, but also on how resources are allocated, and both vary substantially, between and within countries. Safety is particularly important in anesthesia because anesthesia is intrinsically hazardous and not intrinsically therapeutic. Nevertheless, other elements of the quality of health care, notably access, must also be considered. More generally, there are certain prerequisites within society for health, captured in the Jakarta declaration. It is necessary to have adequate infrastructure (notably for transport and primary health care) and hospitals capable of safely carrying out the "Bellwether Procedures" (cesarean delivery, laparotomy, and the treatment of compound fractures). Surgery, supported by safe anesthesia, is critical to the health of populations, but avoidable harm from health care (including very high mortality rates from anesthesia in many parts of the world) is a major global problem. Thus, surgical and anesthesia services must not only be provided, they must be safe. The global anesthesia workforce crisis is a major barrier to achieving this. Many anesthetics today are administered by nonphysicians with limited training and little access to supervision or support, often working in very challenging circumstances. Many organizations, notably the World Health Organization and the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists, are working to improve access to and safety of anesthesia and surgery around the world. Challenges include collaboration with local stakeholders, coordination of effort between agencies, and the need to influence national health policy makers to achieve sustainable improvement. It is conceivable that safe anesthesia and perioperative care could be provided for essential surgical services today by clinicians with moderate levels of training using relatively simple (but appropriately designed and maintained) equipment and a limited number of inexpensive generic medications. However, there is a minimum standard for these resources, below which reasonable safety cannot be assured. This minimum (at least) should be available to all. Not only more resources, but also more equitable distribution of existing resources is required. Thus, the starting point for global access to safe anesthesia is acceptance that access to health care in general should be a basic human right everywhere.

Objective: To conduct a cost analysis of injection laryngoplasty performed in the operating theatre under local anaesthesia and general anaesthesia., Methods: The retrospective study included patients who had undergone injection laryngoplasty as day cases between July 2013 and March 2016. Cost data were obtained, along with patient demographics, anaesthetic details, type of injectant, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, length of stay, total operating theatre time and surgeon procedure time., Results: A total of 20 cases (general anaesthesia = 6, local anaesthesia = 14) were included in the cost analysis. The mean total cost under general anaesthesia (AU$2865.96 ± 756.29) was significantly higher than that under local anaesthesia (AU$1731.61 ± 290.29) (p < 0.001). The mean operating theatre time, surgeon procedure time and length of stay were all significantly lower under local anaesthesia compared to general anaesthesia. Time variables such as operating theatre time and length of stay were the most significant predictors of the total costs., Conclusion: Procedures performed under local anaesthesia in the operating theatre are associated with shorter operating theatre time and length of stay in the hospital, and provide significant cost savings. Further savings could be achieved if local anaesthesia procedures were performed in the office setting.

Background: Anesthesia drugs can be prepared by anesthesia providers, hospital pharmacies or outsourcing facilities. The decision whether to outsource all or some anesthesia drugs is challenging since the costs associated with different anesthesia drug preparation methods remain poorly described., Methods: The costs associated with preparation of 8 commonly used anesthesia drugs were analyzed using a budget impact analysis for 4 different syringe preparation strategies: (1) all drugs prepared by anesthesiologist, (2) drugs prepared by anesthesiologist and hospital pharmacy, (3) drugs prepared by anesthesiologist and outsourcing facility, and (4) all drugs prepared by outsourcing facility., Main Results: A strategy combining anesthesiologist and hospital pharmacy prepared drugs was associated with the lowest estimated annual cost in the base-case budget impact analysis with an annual cost of $225 592, which was lower than other strategies by a margin of greater than $86 000., Conclusion: A combination of anesthesiologist and hospital pharmacy prepared drugs resulted in the lowest annual cost in the budget impact analysis. However, the cost of drugs prepared by an outsourcing facility maybe lower if the capital investment needed for the establishment and maintenance of the US Pharmacopeial Convention Chapter <797> compliant facility is included in the budget impact analysis., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is debate regarding the role of single-anesthetic versus staged bilateral total hip arthroplasty (THA) for patients with end-stage bilateral osteoarthritis. Studies have shown that single-anesthetic bilateral THA is associated with systemic complications, but there are limited data comparing patient outcomes in a matched setting of bilateral THA., Methods: We identified 94 patients (188 hips) who underwent single-anesthetic bilateral THA. Fifty-seven percent of the patients were male. Patients had a mean age of 52.2 years and body mass index of 27.1 kg/m. They were matched 1:1 on the basis of sex, age (±1 year), and year of surgery (±3 years) to a cohort of patients undergoing staged bilateral THA. In the staged group, there was <1 year between procedures (range, 5 days to 10 months). Mean follow-up was 4 years for each group., Results: Patients in the single-anesthetic group experienced shorter total operating room time and length of stay. There was no difference (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73, p = 0.50) in the overall revision-free survival in patients undergoing single-anesthetic or staged bilateral THA. The risks of reoperation (HR = 0.69, p = 0.40), complications (HR = 0.83, p = 0.48), and mortality (HR = 0.47, p = 0.10) were similar. Single-anesthetic bilateral THA reduced the total cost of care (by 27%, p = 0.0001)., Conclusions: In this matched cohort analysis, single-anesthetic bilateral THA was not associated with an increased risk of revision, reoperation, or postoperative complications, while decreasing cost. In our experience, single-anesthetic bilateral THA is a safe procedure that, for certain patients, offers an excellent means to deal with bilateral hip osteoarthritis., Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: The United Nations 2015 Millennium Development Goals targeted a 75% reduction in maternal mortality. However, in spite of this goal, the number of maternal deaths per 100,000 live births remains unacceptably high across Sub-Saharan Africa. Because many of these deaths could likely be averted with access to safe surgery, including cesarean delivery, we set out to assess the capacity to provide safe anesthetic care for mothers in the main referral hospitals in East Africa., Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted at 5 main referral hospitals in East Africa: Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Rwanda, and Burundi. Using a questionnaire based on the World Federation of the Societies of Anesthesiologists (WFSA) international guidelines for safe anesthesia, we interviewed anesthetists in these hospitals, key informants from the Ministry of Health and National Anesthesia Society of each country (Supplemental Digital Content, http://links.lww.com/AA/B561)., Results: Using the WFSA checklist as a guide, none of respondents had all the necessary requirements available to provide safe obstetric anesthesia, and only 7% reported adequate anesthesia staffing. Availability of monitors was limited, and those that were available were often nonfunctional. The paucity of local protocols, and lack of intensive care unit services, also contributed significantly to poor maternal outcomes. For a population of 142.9 million in the East African community, there were only 237 anesthesiologists, with a workforce density of 0.08 in Uganda, 0.39 in Kenya, 0.05 in Tanzania, 0.13 in Rwanda, and 0.02 anesthesiologists in Burundi per 100,000 population in each country., Conclusions: We identified significant shortages of both the personnel and equipment needed to provide safe anesthetic care for obstetric surgical cases across East Africa. There is a need to increase the number of physician anesthetists, to improve the training of nonphysician anesthesia providers, and to develop management protocols for obstetric patients requiring anesthesia. This will strengthen health systems and improve surgical outcomes in developing countries. More funding is required for training physician anesthetists if developing countries are to reach the targeted specialist workforce density of the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery of 20 surgical, anesthetic, and obstetric physicians per 100,000 population by 2030.

Background: Health care service bundling experiments at the state and regional levels have showed reduced costs by providing a single lump-sum reimbursement for anesthesia services, surgery, and postoperative care. Potential for cost savings related to the provision of anesthesia care has the potential to significantly impact sustainability. This study defines and quantifies routine and preventable anesthetic drug waste and the patient, procedure, and anesthesia provider characteristics associated with increased waste., Methods: Over a 12-month period, the type and quantity of clean drugs prepared by the anesthesia team for the first case of the day were recorded. The amount of each drug administered was obtained from the computerized anesthesia record, and data were analyzed to determine the incidence and cost of routine and preventable drug waste. The monthly and yearly cost of preventable waste, including the cost of pharmacy tech labor and materials where applicable, was estimated based on surgical case volume at the study institution. All analyses were performed using SAS software v9.2., Results: Anesthetic drugs prepared for 543 separate surgical cases were observed. Less than 20% of cases generated routine waste. Preventable waste was generated most frequently for ephedrine (59.5% of cases), succinylcholine (33.7%), and lidocaine (25.1%), and least frequently for ondansetron (1.3%), phenylephrine (2.6%), and dexamethasone (2.8%). The estimated yearly cost of preventable anesthetic drug waste was $185,250., Conclusions: Significant potential savings with little impact on clinically significant availability may be achieved through the use of prefilled syringes for some commonly used anesthetic drugs. An intelligently implemented switch to prefilled syringes for select drugs is a potential cost saving measure, but savings might be diminished by disposal of prefilled syringes when they expire, hidden costs in the hospital pharmacy, and inability to supply some medications in prefilled syringes due to stability or manufacturing issues., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Cost effectiveness is becoming increasingly important in today's healthcare environment. Remifentanil, dexmedetomidine, and desflurane are costly agents that often have suitable alternatives to their use. We sought to identify changes in cost and outcomes following interventions that limited the availability of these drugs., Methods: We calculated anesthetic drug costs for all operating room procedures performed before and after the accessibility interventions. We retrospectively compared drug costs per case and the frequency of agent use before and after the interventions. In addition, we analyzed the incidence of adverse outcomes, including delayed out-of-room times, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), unplanned intubations, use of naloxone, and reintubations. Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney and Chi square analyses were used to quantify differences in cost, use, and outcomes between cohorts., Results: Of the 27,233 cases we identified, 24,201 cases were analyzed. The mean anesthetic drug costs per case were significantly lower after the interventions vs before at ($21.44 vs $32.39, respectively), a cost savings of $10.95 (95% confidence interval, $9.86 to $12.04; P < 0.001). Additionally, a comparison of data after vs before the interventions revealed the following results: remifentanil use was significantly lower (3.5% vs 9.2% of cases; P < 0.001). Dexmedetomidine use did not differ significantly (0.4% vs 0.5% of cases; P = 0.07), and desflurane use was significantly lower (0.6% vs 20.2% of cases; P < 0.001). There was no significant relationship between the interventions and the frequency of delayed out-of-room times (15.5% vs 15.9%; P = 0.41), unplanned intubations (0.02% vs 0.03%; P = 0.60), and reintubations (0.01% vs 0.03%; P = 0.28). Postoperative nausea and vomiting decreased significantly after the interventions (22.8% vs 24.4%; P = 0.003), and naloxone use showed a significant increase (0.22% vs 0.11% of cases; P = 0.04)., Conclusions: Reducing the accessibility of these cost-prohibitive agents resulted in significant anesthetic drug cost savings and decreased utilization of remifentanil and desflurane. The interventions had no significant effect on patient recovery time, incidence of unplanned intubations, or incidence of reintubation, but they were associated with a decrease in PONV and an increase in naloxone use.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost of an operating room using data from our hospital. Using an accounting-based method helped us., Methods: Over the year 2012, the sum of direct and indirect expenses with cost sharing expenses allowed us to calculate the cost of the operating room (OR) and of the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU)., Results: The cost of the OR and PACU was €10.8 per minute of time offered. Two thirds of the direct expenses were allocated to surgery and one third to anaesthesia. Indirect expenses were 25% of the direct expenses. The cost of medications and single use medical devises was €111.45 per anaesthesia. The total cost of anaesthesia (taking into account wages and indirect expenses) was €753.14 per anaesthesia as compared to the total cost of the anaesthesia. The part of medications and single use devices for anaesthesia was 14.8% of the total cost., Conclusion: Despite the difficulties facing cost evaluation, this model of calculation, assisted by the cost accounting controller, helped us to have a concrete financial vision. It also shows that a global reflexion is necessary during financial decision-making., (Copyright © 2015 Société française d’anesthésie et de réanimation (Sfar). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

There is a growing emphasis on both cost containment and better quality health care. The creation of better methods for alerting providers and their departments to the costs associated with patient care is one tool for improving efficiency. Since anesthetic medications used in the OR setting are one easily monitored factor contributing to OR costs, anesthetic cost report cards can be used to assess the cost and, potentially the quality of care provided by each practitioner. An ongoing challenge is the identification of the most effective strategies to control costs, promote cost awareness and at the same time maximize quality. To test the scorecard concept, we utilized existing informatics systems to gather and analyze drug costs for anesthesia providers in the OR. Drug costs were analyzed by medication class for each provider. Individual anesthesiologist's anesthetic costs were collected and compared to the average costs of the overall group and individual trends over time were noted. We presented drug usage data in an electronic report card format. Real-time individual reports can be provided to anesthesiologists to allow for anesthetic cost feedback. Data provided can include number of cases, average case time, total anesthetic medication costs, and average anesthetic cost per case. Also included can be subcategories of pre-medication, antibiotics, hypnotics, local anesthetics, neuromuscular blocking drugs, analgesics, vasopressors, beta-blockers, anti-emetics, volatile anesthetics, and reversal agents. The concept of anesthetic cost report card should be further developed for individual feedback, and could include many other dimensions. Such a report card can be utilized to encourage lower anesthetic costs, quality improvement among anesthesia providers, and for cost containment in the operating room.

Objectives: The aim of this study is to analyze the direct cost of different anaesthetic techniques used within the Author's hospital setting and compare with costs reported in the literature., Methods: Mean cost of drugs and devices used in our local Department of Anaesthesia was considered in the present study. All drugs were supplied by the in-house Pharmacy Service of Parma's General Hospital. All calculation have been made using an hypothetical ASA1 patient weighting 70 kg. The quality of consumption and cost of inhalation anaesthesia with sevoflurane or desflurane at different fresh gas flow were analyzed, and the cost of total venous anaesthesia (TIVA) using propofol and remifentanil with balanced anaesthesia were also analyzed. In addition, direct costs of general, spinal and sciatic-femoral nerve block anaesthesia used for common plastic surgery procedures were assessed., Result: The results of our study show that the cost of inhalational anaesthesia decreases using fresh gas flow below 1L, and the use of desflurane is more expensive. In our Hospital, the cost of TIVA is more or less equivalent to the costs of balanced anaesthesia with sevoflurane in surgical procedure lasting more than five hours. The direct cost was lower for the spinal anaesthesia compared with general anaesthesia and sciatic- femoral nerve block for some surgical procedures. (www.actabiomedica.it).

Context: Appendectomy is generally conducted as open or by laparoscopic surgical techniques under general anesthesia., Aims: This study aims to compare the anesthetic costs of the patients, who underwent open or laparoscopic appendectomy under general anesthesia., Settings and Design: The design is retrospective and records of 379 patients who underwent open or laparoscopic appendectomy under general anesthesia, falling under the category of I-III risk group according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification between the years 2011 and 2013, and aged 18-77., Subjects and Methods: Open (Group I) or laparoscopic (Group II) appendectomy operation under general anesthesia were evaluated retrospectively by utilizing hospital automation and anesthesia observation records. This study evaluated the anesthesia time of the patients and total costs (Turkish Lira ₺, US dollar $) of anesthetic agents used (induction, maintenance), necessary medical materials (connecting line, endotracheal tube, airway, humidifier, branule, aspiration probe), and intravenously administered fluids were evaluated., Statistical Analysis Used: We used Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software (SPSS version 17.0) for statistical analysis., Results: Of the patients, 237 were males (62.53%) and 142 were females (37.47%). Anesthesia time limits were established as 70.30 ± 30.23 minute in Group I and 74.92 ± 31.83 minute in Group II. Mean anesthesia administration cost per patient was found to be 78.79 ± 30.01₺ (39.16 ± 14.15$) in Group I and 83.09 ± 26.85₺ (41.29 ± 13.34$) in Group II (P > 0.05). A correlation was observed between cost and operation times (P = 0.002, r = 0.158)., Conclusions: Although a statistical difference was not established in this study in terms of time and costs in appendectomy operations conducted as open and laparoscopically, changes may occur in time in market conditions of drugs, patent rights, legal regulations, and prices. Therefore, we believe that it would be beneficial to update and revise cost analyses from time to time.

Objective: To systematically appraise published comparative effectiveness evidence (clinical and economic) of epidural steroid injections (ESI) for lumbar spinal stenosis and to estimate Medicare reimbursement amounts for ESI procedures. TYPE: Systematic review., Literature Survey: PubMed, Embase, and CINAHL were searched through August 2012 for key words that pertain to low back pain, spinal stenosis or sciatica, and epidural steroid injection. We used institutional and Medicare reimbursement amounts for our cost estimation. Articles published in English that assessed ESIs for adults with lumbar spinal stenosis versus a comparison intervention were included. Our search identified 146 unique articles, and 138 were excluded due to noncomparative study design, not having a study population with lumbar spinal stenosis, not having an appropriate outcome, or not being in English. We fully summarized 6 randomized controlled trials and 2 large observational studies., Methodology: Randomized controlled trial articles were reviewed, and the study population, sample size, treatment groups, ESI dosage, ESI approaches, concomitant interventions, outcomes, and follow-up time were reported. Descriptive resource use estimates for ESIs were calculated with use of data from our institution during 2010 and Medicare-based reimbursement amounts., Synthesis: ESIs or anesthetic injections alone resulted in better short-term improvement in walking distance compared with control injections. However, there were no longer-term differences. No differences between ESIs versus anesthetic in self-reported improvement in pain were reported. Transforaminal approaches had better improvement in pain scores (≤4 months) compared with interlaminar injections. Two observational studies indicated increased rates of lumbar ESI in Medicare beneficiaries. Our sample included 279 patients who received at least 1 ESI during 2010, with an estimated mean total outpatient reimbursement for one ESI procedure "event" to be $637, based on 2010 Medicare reimbursement amounts ($505 technical and $132 professional payments)., Conclusion: This systematic review of ESI for treating lumbar spinal stenosis found a limited amount of data that suggest that ESI is effective in some patients for improving select short-term outcomes, but results differed depending on study design, outcome measures used, and comparison groups evaluated. Overall, there are relatively few comparative clinical or economic studies for ESI procedures for lumbar spinal stenosis in adults, which indicated a need for additional evidence., (Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

In the current study, we assessed and evaluated the costs and benefits of three popular methods of general anesthesia practiced in our department for gynecological laparoscopic surgery in recent years. Sixty adult female patients who underwent elective gynecological laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia were randomly divided into three groups: group V, group I and group C. In group V, anesthesia was induced intravenously with midazolam, remifentanil, propofol and vecuronium, and maintained with continuous infusion of propofol and remifentanil. In group I, anesthesia was intravenously induced with midazolam, fentanyl, propofol and vecuronium, and maintained with inhaled isoflurane and intravenous bonus of fentanyl. In group C, anesthesia was induced as in group I, but maintained with isoflurane inhalation combined with propofolremifentanil infusion. All patients received vecuronium for muscle relaxation. Perioperative incidences of complications and total anesthesia costs for patients in all groups were recorded. In addition, postoperative satisfaction of the patients was also noted, and similar outcomes of the satisfaction were reported in all 60 patients. Although there was no statistical significance among groups, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting were higher in group C, and the rates of shivering and the needs for analgesics were higher in group V. Anesthesia costs in group I were the lowest. Therefore, it is concluded that the costs of anesthesia induced with midazolam, fentanyl, propofol, vecuronium, and maintained with isoflurane, fentanyl and vecuronium are cheapest, and there is no significant difference in patients' satisfaction and safety among the three above-mentioned methods of anesthesia in our department.

Introduction: Anesthesia management is characterized by salary limiting and pressure for decreasing anesthetics and other drug budget. The aim of this paper is to determine the possibility of reducing the direct costs in anesthesia., Materials and Methods: This paper is a part ofa five-year (2005-2009), academic, pharmaco-economic retrospective- prospective study (phase IV). The study was done according to European Union Directive for Clinical Research. We retrospectively calculated and analyzed all anesthesia direct costs (personnel costs, anesthetics and other drug costs, materials, laboratory analyses, and machines) at the Institute For Ane- sthesia and Reanimation, Clinical Center of Serbia in relation to the costs refunded by National Health Insurance in all patients who underwent anesthesia in 2006., Results: Out of 70 195 anesthesia services rendered to 32 267 patients in one-year period, 47% were general anesthesia, 23% were local anesthesia, and 30% were anesthetic procedures. Our results of highly significant association between personnel costs (r = 0.980, p = 0.000) and consumption of anesthetics and drugs (r = 0.885, p = 0.000) with the direct costs do not provide an opportunity for further cost reduction due to disassociation of direct costs and the "unit price" of National Health Insurance issued in terms of the restricted maximum budget for health., Conclusion: There is no space for direct cost reduction in anesthesia.

Purpose of Review: The current economic climate has put pressure on healthcare systems and providers, including anesthesiologists, to minimize costs without sacrificing patient safety. In this review, we discuss costs associated with anesthesia care, including medications and intraoperative monitoring, and suggest ways to reduce wastes and overall expenditure., Recent Findings: Significant amount, perhaps 20-50%, of drugs drawn up are never used but discarded as whole ampoules or vials. There has been a progressive shift to using more expensive inhalational agents and total intravenous anesthesia in the last 10 years. Highest drug costs are associated with total intravenous anesthesia protocols, which are five to 10 times more expensive than administering sevoflurane or desflurane with premedication using antiemetics. Among the inhalational agents, usage costs of sevoflurane and desflurane are 10 and 25 times, respectively, that of isoflurane. Bispectral index monitoring, which requires use of an expensive proprietary electrode is no better, perhaps even less effective, than titration of inhalational agents using end tidal anesthetic concentration to monitor depth of anesthesia and prevent intraoperative awareness., Summary: Anesthesia medications comprise a significant proportion of hospital pharmacy budgets. Average anesthesia-related cost reductions of US$ 13-30 per cases multiplied by 25 million anesthetics administered annually in the USA has the potential to yield savings of US$ 350-750 million. Bispectral index monitoring during inhalational anesthesia adds to the cost without providing any benefit.

Introduction: Drugs are real and transparent costs of treatment, which are subject to constant monitoring and changes. The study was aimed at measuring and analyzing consumption of anesthetics and other drugs in anesthesia in the Clinical Centre of Serbia., Material and Methods: This paper is part of a five-year (2005-2009), academic, pharmacoeconomic retrospective-prospective study (the 4th phase). We calculated the costs of anesthetics and other drugs in all anesthetized patients at the Institute of Anesthesia and Reanimation, Clinical Center of Serbia in 2006. The data, obtained from the Clinical Centre of Serbia Database, were analyzed by descriptive statistical methods using computer program Microsoft Office Excel 2003 and the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows., Results: The amount of money spent for the application of 33,187 general and 16,394 local anesthesia and 20,614 anesthesiology procedures was 83,322,046.36 RSD (Euros 1,054,705.4), which was 5.93% of the funds allocated for all drugs used at the Clinical Center of Serbia. Of the total fund for drugs, 57.8% was spent for anesthetics (local anesthetics 1.20%) and muscle relaxants, whereas 42.2% was spent for other drugs in anesthesia. The highest amount was spent at the Emergency Center (35.8%), then at the Cardio-surgery (11.9%) and the Neurosurgery (10.9%) because of the large number and length of surgical interventions., Conclusion: There is no space for rationalizing the costs of anesthetics and other drugs in anesthesia.

Background: The costs of anaesthesia in Polish hospitals are usually calculated as a percentage of the cost of the surgical procedure, or as a percentage of the total cost of the operating theatre. These methods cannot be accurate, since they do not take into consideration, the specifics of anaesthesia. Therefore, a new method of calculation, based of the actual use of materials and manpower, has been introduced in our institution., Methods: Anaesthesia procedures were divided into nine categories, according to risk of anaesthesia, type of surgery, type of anaesthesia, and working hours of the anaesthetic personnel. Each category was priced in points which expressed the actual value of the service provided, and the resulting totals were allocated to surgical specialties., Results: The costs of anaesthesia calculated by the new method differed markedly from previous calculations. The number of anaesthetics between 2008 and 2010 increased by 20%, while the cumulative costs of anaesthesia rose by only 13%, when compared to the previous method of calculation. Changes in anaesthesia costs, in various surgical specialties, varied from -49% to +65%, and were not related to the number of procedures., Conclusion: The new scoring system made it possible to calculate actual anaesthesia costs in various surgical specialties. It is logical and practical and merits recommendation.

The economic evaluation of medications and health care technology has gained importance in recent years. Health care resources are limited and their use must be optimized so that we can take the greatest possible advantage. Pharmacoeconomics seeks to analyze the best therapeutic drug choices to obtain the desired outcome in specific cases or in populations. The 4 approaches used in pharmacoeconomics are cost-minimization analysis, cost-benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and cost-utility analysis. This review examines the characteristics of each type of study using examples from anesthesiology, a field in which pharmacoeconomics is beginning to play a role.

Purpose of Review: In the current era of limited resources, organizations are evaluating the cost-effectiveness of their care. To analyze the cost-effectiveness of a physiologic monitor, one must first determine what negative outcome will be reduced or what positive outcome will be promoted. For example, if one was studying the cost-effectiveness of the pulse oximeter, it would be important to state whether the endpoint is prevention of hypoxic events or prevention of myocardial infarction. One would then need outcome data demonstrating the incidence of the chosen endpoint with and without the monitor. With these data, one can begin to construct a model for cost-effectiveness. Like many medical technologies, the bispectral index (BIS) monitor has recently been the subject of several articles which study its cost-effectiveness. This review examines the rationale of cost-effectiveness analyses and their application specifically to the BIS monitor., Recent Findings: The BIS monitor has been shown in multiple prospective randomized studies to positively affect several important aspects of an anesthetic. Use of the BIS monitor results in less use of hypnotic anesthetic drugs, decreased time to extubation, decreased incidence of nausea and vomiting, and decreased intraoperative awareness. These benefits are achieved for an additional cost of around five dollars per anesthetic. In addition, there is an emerging body of literature demonstrating an association between low intraoperative BIS readings and decreasing intermediate-term survival in both noncardiac and cardiac surgical patients., Summary: Given the trivial cost of the BIS and the proven benefits demonstrated in prospective randomized studies, we consider its use justified in every general anesthetic.

Cost awareness for the drugs and disposables commonly used by anaesthetic staff has previously been poor. In our study, fifty anaesthetic staff were asked to estimate the cost of thirty-three commonly used drugs and disposables. Expensive items were consistently underestimated whereas inexpensive items were consistently overestimated. There was no overall correlation between the number of years of anaesthetic experience and cost awareness. These findings demonstrate poor knowledge regarding the cost of drugs and consumables amongst anaesthetic staff.

Objective: To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of anesthetic agents to reduce the pain of peripheral intravenous cannulation in an emergency department (ED) setting., Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis in which costs were measured as the cost of the agent plus costs associated with time in the ED using data from our hospital cost accounting system. Outcomes were measured as improvements in the self-reported visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores. Variables considered unique to the various agents were cost of the agent, time to peak onset, success rates of cannulation, and mean reduction in VAS scores., Setting: Decision model. Patients A cohort of patients aged 3 through 18 years enrolled in randomized controlled trials that compared analgesic modalities to facilitate peripheral intravenous cannulation was identified through medical databases searched from their inception (earliest year, 1966) through June 2007., Main Outcome Measures: The main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which represented the additional cost that must be incurred by the hospital to obtain a reduction of 1 additional unit (10 mm or 1 cm) in the VAS score compared with a baseline option of no anesthetic., Results: Our results suggest that the needle-free jet injection of lidocaine device had the lowest incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, followed by intradermal injection of buffered lidocaine; lidocaine iontophoresis; nitrous oxide inhalation analgesia; a heated lidocaine and tetracaine patch; sonophoresis with lidocaine cream, 4%; lidocaine cream alone, 4%; and use of a eutectic mixture of lidocaine and prilocaine cream., Conclusion: Currently, the needle-free jet injection of lidocaine device and injection of buffered lidocaine appear to provide the most cost-effective alternatives to pediatric ED physicians.

Background: The cost of wasted anesthetic related agents has not been clear in Japanese hospitals. We investigated whether the trainees in anesthesiology influence the cost of wasted anesthetic related agents., Methods: Investigation was carried out at the University of Tokyo Hospital. We interviewed each trainee in anesthesiology about all prepared anesthetic drugs and wasted ones at the end of each anesthetic management., Results: The percentage of wasted ampoules of anesthetic related agents was 15.85%, but the percentage of wasted cost was 5.15%. A large difference was not observed in transition of training period, and this percentage was not improved by training. We considered that this wasted cost is within permissible ranges in comparison with other reports., Conclusions: During the training it is also important to develop a sense of medical economics.

The anaesthetic activities of steam distillates of Adenia gummifera stem on Apis mellifera were evaluated by a diffusion method. Live, direct and fractional (61-80 degrees C fraction) distillates had greater anaesthetic effect while vacuum distillates were mild. The anaesthetic activity significantly increased with concentration up to 6% (v/v), and then it levelled off, while excessive exposure was lethal. The number of bees in a given volume had no significant effect on anaesthetic activity but container volume (F(cal) = 66.4; F(3,8) = 4.07) and bee-distillate distance (F(cal) = 31.0; F(2,6) = 5.14) did, suggesting the rate of diffusion of active component could be the determining factor. The active component is likely to contain amines and the rest halogenated alkane.

The precise titration of anaesthetic agents is necessary to avoid the consequences of a too light depth of anaesthesia such as unexpected intraoperative awareness, as well as a too deep level of anaesthesia, which can be deleterious in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality. The clinical evaluation of the depth of anaesthesia is poorly sensitive and specific. It does not permit to distinguish between pharmacodynamic components of anaesthesia. Several paraclinical depth of anaesthesia indices are currently available. Most of them are mainly designed to monitor the depth of the hypnotic component of anaesthesia. Their calculation is mostly based on the mathematical analysis of the electroencephalogram. They are efficient at reducing the incidence of unexpected intraoperative awareness, adjusting anaesthetic depth at an individual scale, predicting the time needed for recovery, allowing early extubation of patients, reducing their length of stay in the post anaesthesia care unit, and limiting the number of episodes of peroperative over and under dosage of anaesthetic agents. The knowledge of conditions that may impede the accurate interpretation of those indices is mandatory for an optimal use. Although undoubtedly beneficial for the patients, the use of those monitors is frequently responsible for supplementary' costs, particularly when the procedure is short.

In developed countries, the choice of an anaesthetic agent for induction of anaesthesia remains based mainly on its pharmacodynamic properties. Until now, cardiovascular effects were the main factor in this decision. However, other factors, such as the depth of anaesthesia and effects on cortisol synthesis, can modify this simplistic view. A better understanding of the relationships between the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of these drugs, and the availability of new techniques, such as target-controlled infusions of anaesthetic drugs and inhalation induction, have led practitioners to the understanding that the way a drug is administered is a far more important factor for maintaining haemodynamic stability than the specific agent used. The ability of a drug to maintain spontaneous ventilation and to relax the upper airway is another factor in this decision, especially when considering difficult intubation, laryngeal mask insertion or tracheal intubation without neuromuscular blockade. Beyond the factors mentioned above, anaesthetists adapt current practice to suit patients' willingness to comply with anaesthesia and to avoid the adverse effects that are most often feared by the patient. Although most practitioners are not concerned with the cost of anaesthesia, cost-containment policies have led some institutions to restrict the use of the more expensive drugs to particular indications. However, this is too simplistic an approach for the reduction of global costs, as other direct medical costs, such as those for staffing, form a greater proportion of total costs than do direct drug costs. Cost-benefit and cost-efficacy studies of the anaesthetics used for induction of anaesthesia are needed to help anaesthetists to choose a drug based on both cost and pharmacodynamic or pharmacokinetic properties.

Total hip or knee replacement surgeries are common orthopedic interventions that can be performed with spinal anesthesia (SA) or general anesthesia (GA). No study has investigated the economic aspects associated with the two anesthetic techniques for this common surgery. We randomized 40 patients to receive either SA or GA and analyzed the drug and supply costs for anesthesia und recovery. Anesthesia-related times, hemodynamic variables, and pain scores were also recorded. Total costs per case without personnel costs were almost half in the SA group compared with the GA group; this was a result of less cost for anesthesia (P < 0.01) and for recovery (P < 0.05). This finding was supported by a sensitivity analysis. There were no relevant differences regarding anesthesia-related times. Patients in the GA group were admitted to the postanesthesia care unit with a higher pain score and needed more analgesics than patients in the SA group (both P < 0.01). We conclude that SA is a more cost-effective alternative to GA in patients undergoing hip or knee replacement, as it is associated with lower fixed and variable costs. Moreover, SA seems to be more effective, as patients in the SA group showed lower postoperative pain scores during their stay in the postanesthesia care unit.

Background: Blood sampling is a frequent medical procedure, very often considered as a stressful experience by children. Local anesthetics have been developed, but are expensive and not reimbursed by insurance companies in our country. We wanted to assess parents' willingness to pay (WTP) for this kind of drug., Patients and Methods: Over 6 months, all parents of children presenting for general (GV) or specialized visit (SV) with blood sampling. WTP was assessed through three scenarios [avoiding blood sampling (ABS), using the drug on prescription (PD), or over the counter (OTC)], with a payment card system randomized to ascending or descending order of prices (AO or DO)., Results: Fifty-six responses were collected (34 GV, 22 SV, 27 AO and 29 DO), response rate 40%. Response distribution was wide, with median WTP of 40 for ABS, 25 for PD, 10 for OTC, which is close to the drug's real price. Responses were similar for GV and SV. Median WTP amounted to 0.71, 0.67, 0.20% of respondents' monthly income for the three scenarios, respectively, with a maximum at 10%., Conclusions: Assessing parents' WTP in an outpatient setting is difficult, with wide result distribution, but median WTP is close to the real drug price. This finding could be used to promote insurance coverage for this drug.

Objectives: sedation is central to the management of intensive care patients. The aim of this study was to establish the current sedation practice in Maghrebian intensive care units (ICUs). The use of sedation policies with or without a written protocol, the use of scoring systems, the influence of costs on drug choice, the most common drugs for sedation and the use of neuromuscular blocking agents., Methods: a self-administered questionnaire composed of 20 items was sent to 138 intensivists in the Maghreb working in 25 teaching hospitals and 16 private clinics., Results: 50 of 138 questionnaires were returned (response rate = 36.2%). Midazolam and Fentanyl were the main sedative agents used (respectively 98% and 87%) less than 14% of the ICUs used the Propofol mainly in the first 48 hours. A sedation policy was adopted in 63.6% with a written protocol in 20% of cases. Sedation scoring systems were noted in 14.3% of cases (RAMSAY scale in 100%). Economic aspect was important for 64.6% of ICUs., Discussion: sedation may seem secondary in the initial management of intensive care patients, only 63% of our respondents had a sedation policy and 20% a written protocol though its use is thought to improve outcome and reduce costs. Economic aspect was important for the choice of the drug to use (64%), this may explain the preferential use of Midazolam 98% in association with an analgesic (Fentanyl: 85%) while Propofol is used only in 14% though pharmacoeconomic studies may be in fact in favor of the latter. Neuromuscular blocking agents are less frequently used (16%) mainly because of the risk of complications.

The authors present an analysis of literature data regarding correlations between health-related quality of life (HRQL), quality of anesthesia, quality assurance and pharmaco-economic factors in the context of patient-based individual perception of a life threatening situation in the perioperative period. The main attention was given to the quantification of HRQL as a new clinical parameter and methodological problems were emphasized.

Background: Little is known about differences in costs to provide anesthesia care for different surgical subspecialties and which factors influence the subspecialty-specific costs., Methods: In this retrospective study, the authors determined main cost components (preoperative visit, intraoperative personnel costs, material and pharmaceutical costs, and others) for 10,843 consecutive anesthesia cases from a 6-month period in the 10 largest anesthesia subspecialties in their university hospital: ophthalmology; general surgery; obstetrics and gynecology; ear, nose, and throat surgery; oral and facial surgery; neurosurgery; orthopedics; cardiovascular surgery; traumatology; and urology. Using regression analysis, the effect of five presumed cost drivers (anesthesia duration, emergency status, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of III or higher, patient age younger 6 yr, and placement of invasive monitoring) on subspecialty-specific costs per anesthesia minute were analyzed., Results: Both personnel costs for anesthesiologists and total costs calculated per anesthesia minute were inversely correlated with the duration of anesthesia (adjusted R2 = 0.75 and 0.69, respectively), i.e., they were higher for subspecialties with short cases and lower for subspecialties with longer cases. The multiple regression model showed that differences in anesthesia duration alone accounted for the majority of the cost differences, whereas the other presumed cost drivers added only little to explain subspecialty-specific cost differences., Conclusions: Different anesthesia subspecialties show significant and financially important differences regarding their specific costs. Personnel costs and total costs are highest for subspecialties with the shortest cases. Other analyzed cost drivers had little effect on subspecialty-specific costs. In the light of these cost differences, a detailed cost analysis seems necessary before the profitability of an anesthesia subspecialty can be assessed.

Background: Ambulatory surgery is growing in popularity worldwide. For example, 50-70% of surgical procedures in North America are performed on an ambulatory basis. Use of Bispectral Index (BIS) monitoring for titration of general anesthesia may allow use of less anesthetics, reduction in side effects, and faster patient recovery., Methods: MEDLINE and other databases were searched for randomized controlled trials examining the use of BIS monitoring versus standard practice in ambulatory surgery patients. Outcomes were extracted from these articles, and a meta-analysis was performed., Results: One thousand three hundred eighty subjects from 11 trials were included in the meta-analysis. The use of BIS monitoring significantly reduced anesthetic consumption by 19%, reduced the incidence of nausea/vomiting (32% vs. 38%; odds ratio, 0.77), and reduced time in the recovery room by 4 min. However, these benefits did not result in significant reduction in time until patient discharge from the ambulatory surgery unit. Cost analysis using pooled costs to reflect North America, Europe, and Asia indicated that use of BIS monitoring increased the cost per patient by 5.55 US dollars because of the cost of BIS electrodes., Conclusions: The use of BIS monitoring modestly reduced anesthetic consumption, risk of nausea and vomiting, and recovery room time. These benefits did not reduce time spent in the ambulatory surgery unit, and cost of the BIS electrode exceeded any cost savings.

Background: Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is a complex outpatient surgical procedure often associated with pain. Traditionally, the procedure is performed under general anesthesia and often requires the use of the PACU. Refractory pain and/or nausea/vomiting occasionally leads to an unplanned hospital admission. In this study, the authors examine the associations of nerve block analgesia for these patients and its associated reductions in PACU use, hospital admission, and hospital costs., Methods: This was an observational, nonrandomized study in which existing data regarding patients' day-of-surgery outcomes were merged with hospital cost data. We reviewed a consecutive sample of 948 men and women who were in good health and underwent anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in an outpatient surgery unit between July 1995 and June 1999., Results: The use of nerve block analgesia was associated with reduced PACU admissions to 18% and decreased unplanned hospital admission rates from 17% to 4%. Multivariate linear regression analysis showed that patients bypassing the PACU had an associated hospital cost reduction of 12% (P = 0.0001), whereas patients who needed hospital admission had an associated hospital cost increase of 11% (P = 0.0003)., Conclusions: The use of nerve blocks for acute pain management in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is associated with PACU bypass and reliable same-day discharge. Although the cost savings for this one procedure are unlikely to generate sufficient cost savings via staffing reductions, extrapolating these results to a large volume of all types of invasive outpatient orthopedic procedures may have the potential to create significant hospital cost savings.

The present study was performed in order to identify the cost of drugs used without documenting them in the patients' file and the wastage of drugs in a pediatric anesthesiology ward. In a prospective, blinded, observational design, drug utilization of 610 consecutive patients, undergoing an elective or emergency surgical procedure was evaluated. The number of undocumented drugs per 100 requested units and the number of wasted drugs per 100 requested units were computed and multiplied by its corresponding unitary cost. The median undocumented cost was 92.4 US dollars (95% CI 17.2-216.6 dollars) per 100 requested units. Succinylcholine (40 mg/2 mL) was the main undocumented drug; its use was not documented in approximately 50% cases in which this neuromuscular blocking agent was requested. However, rocuronium and nalbuphine had the highest unjustified cost, 770.6 dollars and 847.0 dollars per 100 requested units, respectively. Ketorolac, diclofenac, metamizol, furosemide, methylprednisolone, sodium bicarbonate, and cisatracurium were requested and documented. The median cost of wasted drug was 141.8 dollars (95% CI 55.8-448.2 dollars) per 100 requested drugs. More than 80% of adrenaline, naloxone, flunitrazepam, ephedrine, and cisatracurium were wasted. However, the highest cost of wasted drugs was for ondansetron, cisatracurium, methylprednisolone, and rocuronium. The uncontrolled availability and use of drugs may represent an important amount of resources wasted without any awareness of the staff in a department of pediatric anesthesia.

In this prospective, randomized study, we compared hemodynamics, oxygenation, possible intraoperative awareness, and costs in 62 patients undergoing first-time elective coronary artery bypass grafting at 2 different levels of anesthesia. Depth of anesthesia was assessed with bispectral index (BIS). All patients were anesthetized with sufentanil/midazolam. The dosage of sufentanil/midazolam was adjusted to achieve a BIS level of 45-55 in 32 patients (Group BIS 50), whereas in 30 patients a BIS level of 35-45 was intended (Group BIS 40). Data were obtained at six different time points before, during, and after surgery. All patients were asked about possible intraoperative awareness on the third postoperative day. There were no significant differences of any hemodynamic or oxygenation variables at any time between the two groups. BIS 40 patients received significantly (P < 0.05) more sufentanil (BIS 40, 888 +/- 211 microg; BIS 50, 514 +/- 99 microg) and midazolam (BIS 40, 22.4 +/- 5.6 mg; BIS 50, 16.6 +/- 3.7 mg) than BIS 50 patients. The reduction in anesthetic drugs used saved euro;13.78/US$12.54 per patient (P < 0.05) in Group BIS 50, but one BIS electrode caused additional costs of 19.95 Euros/18.15 US dollars. Time to extubation was not significantly prolonged in Group BIS 40 (BIS 40, 14.3 +/- 4.6 h; BIS 50, 11.8 +/- 3.8 h). There was no explicit memory during anesthesia in either group. BIS-guided reduction of anesthetic medication saved costs and did not increase the risk of intraoperative awareness. However, total costs were increased by monitoring BIS, because of the BIS electrodes.

The imminent introduction of the DRG (diagnosis-related-group) system is putting hospitals in Germany under considerable pressure. This requires that personnel are efficiently allocated by optimizing organizational procedures and that the limited resources be distributed in a cost-effective manner. One prerequisite for this is a marked cost-consciousness on the part of those who "incur costs" in providing a service. To increase the awareness of costs in clinical physicians, the cost structures must be transparent. In order to achieve this goal, a project was initiated at the Department of Anaesthesiology at the University Hospital of Heidelberg, which aimed to enhance the cost-consciousness of the staff by making price lists available to anaesthesiologists at the workplace. In addition to the price lists, the 25 most expensive medications and medical products were added as an ABC analysis. The departmental staff was interviewed by questionnaire as to whether this project was reasonable. After 1 year the interview was repeated. The results of the questionnaire showed that in the opinion of the staff, price lists are an effective tool, as cost-consciousness on the part of clinical physicians can be enhanced by making price structures transparent. This is a major prerequisite for individual motivation in the cost-effective management. Although the ABC analyses demonstrate no long-term effect of the price-transparency on the cost structures, the staff showed increased cost-consciousness and individual motivation for economic tasks.

Open-heart surgery (OHS) is performed to bypass occluded arteries, replace malfunctioning cardiac valves or correct congenital abnormalities. The average cost of OHS varies from $US25 057-$US79 795 (1997 values). The objective of this paper was to review economic studies of pharmacological strategies in open-heart surgery. Pharmacological strategies studied include the prevention of postoperative complications such as atrial fibrillation (AF), bleeding and infection. Modifications in anaesthetic technique have been attempted by using agents that promote early extubation. In addition, strategies for postoperative management of sedation, analgesia and AF and use of neuromuscular blockers have also been compared. The majority of studies in this area have been cost analyses with few cost-effectiveness studies performed. Prophylaxis against AF with amiodarone is associated with a reduction in AF and was cost-neutral compared with placebo. Compared with placebo, prevention of bleeding with antifibrinolytics reduces transfusion costs. In direct comparative studies, lysine analogues, due to lower drug acquisition costs, offset transfusion costs to a greater extent than aprotinin. However, safety concerns with the lysine analogues remain. Erythropoietin decreases transfusion requirements and is cost effective compared with no intervention when the cost of postoperative bacterial complications is included. First- and second-generation cephalosporins prevent postoperative infections. Based on drug acquisition cost, the first-generation agents are less expensive although when administration costs are included, both classes have similar costs. Modifications in anaesthetic technique with short-acting anaesthetic agents, results in higher drug costs although nursing and total hospital costs are typically reduced. For neuromuscular blockers, drug acquisition costs are lowest with pancuronium but administration costs and the cost of adverse events have not been included in existing analyses. Midazolam provides an equivalent level of postoperative sedation to propofol but the acquisition cost is lower. The combined use of propofol and midazolam warrants further investigation, as its use is associated with lower sedative agent costs compared with either agent alone. There is limited data on the economics of postoperative analgesia and the management of AF. As the majority of studies to date are partial cost analyses, additional studies that include length of stay and other hospitalisation data are warranted. In future, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility studies, which incorporate quality of life and the cost of adverse effects and other longer term costs, should be undertaken.

Healthcare costs are rising in all areas of medicine, especially in high technology specialities such as anaesthesia. Therefore, cost containment and reduction have become major goals in many hospitals and anaesthesia departments. One area that has received substantial attention is the cost of pharmaceutical products, in particular the cost of newer, shorter-acting inhaled and intravenous anaesthetics, analgesics and neuromuscular blocking agents. Numerous pharmacoeconomic studies have been published on the theoretical analysis of anaesthetic drug costs and the potential benefit of various anaesthesia techniques. However, the results are not conclusive and anaesthesia departments continue to seek ways to reduce costs. In this review, we intend to discuss cost terminology, common areas of cost containment in anaesthesia and the relationship of anaesthesia care costs to total perioperative costs.