[Clonidine compared to midazolam for intravenous premedication for ambulatory procedures. A controlled double blind study in ASA 1 patients]. Midazolam premedication increases sedation but does not prolong discharge times after brief outpatient general anesthesia for laparoscopic tubal sterilization. A comparison of propranolol and diazepam for preoperative anxiolysis. Intravenous versus epidural administration of hydromorphone. Effects on analgesia and recovery after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Temazepam and recovery in day surgery. The perioperative effects of oral premedication in children. A pharmacy discharge plan for hospitalized elderly patients--a randomized controlled trial. The effect of cerebral monitoring on recovery after general anesthesia: a comparison of the auditory evoked potential and bispectral index devices with standard clinical practice. Comparison of postoperative analgesic effects of preemptively used epidural ketamine and neostigmine. Does the use of electroencephalographic bispectral index or auditory evoked potential index monitoring facilitate recovery after desflurane anesthesia in the ambulatory setting? Multimodal antiemetic management prevents early postoperative vomiting after outpatient laparoscopy. Bispectral index monitoring allows faster emergence and improved recovery from propofol, alfentanil, and nitrous oxide anesthesia. BIS Utility Study Group. Thoracic epidural anesthesia for cardiac surgery: the effects on tracheal intubation time and length of hospital stay. Effects of perioperative analgesic technique on the surgical outcome and duration of rehabilitation after major knee surgery. The effect of preoperative ondansetron on the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing outpatient dentoalveolar surgery and general anesthesia. Intravenous narcotics for premedication in outpatient anaesthesia.
Midazolam is frequently used for premedication in day-case surgical patients whereas clonidine is rarely administered for this indication. However, clonidine has several useful effects that make the drug an interesting alternative to conventional premedicants. Thus, in this randomised, double-blind, and controlled study the anxiolytic effect of midazolam was compared to that of clonidine. Furthermore, effects on postoperative complaints and minor complications, and readiness for discharge were investigated.
                100 ASA-1 patients undergoing wisdom teeth extraction on a day-case basis were included into the analysis. A further 50 patients who received no premedication served as a control group. General anaesthesia was standardised (propofol-fentanyl-isoflurane in N2O/O2). The anxiolytic effect of the premedication was assessed using the Erlanger anxiety- and tension scale (EAS). The test was applied before and after intravenous premedication with 1.5 micrograms/kg clonidine or 50 micrograms/kg midazolam and repeated once postoperatively. During recovery the incidence and severity of pain, nausea and vomiting, and shivering were recorded. The readiness for discharge was assessed using standardised discharge criteria. The recording of data was completed by a telephone interview on the day after surgery.
                The demographic data of the groups did not differ. In the two treatment groups there was a time-dependent decrease of anxiety and tension. However, postoperatively there was no difference between the levels of anxiety and inner tension between the premedicated patients and the untreated control group. Furthermore there was no difference in the incidence and severity of any postoperative complications. Time until the patients were ready for discharge did not differ between the three groups.
                The effects of an intravenous premedication with 1.5 micrograms/kg clonidine or 50 micrograms/kg midazolam, respectively in young ASA-1 patients undergoing minor surgical procedures on a day-case basis are restricted to decrease of anxiety and inner tension before surgery. No beneficial effects were found during the postoperative period compared with untreated control patients. Preoperatively administered midazolam may contribute to postoperative sedation and delayed recovery from brief outpatient general anesthesia, particularly in patients who receive significant postoperative opioid analgesics. We evaluated the effects of midazolam premedication (0.04 mg/kg) on postoperative sedation and recovery times after laparoscopic tubal sterilization (Falope rings) in 30 healthy women in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients received midazolam or saline-placebo intravenously 10 min before anesthesia. General anesthesia was induced with fentanyl, propofol, and mivacurium and was maintained with N2O and isoflurane. Sedation was quantified before and after premedication and 15, 30, and 60 min after emergence from anesthesia, using the digit-symbol substitution (DSST) and Trieger dot (TDT) tests. Management of postoperative pain and nausea and discharge criteria were standardized. Groups were similar with respect to age, weight, and duration of surgery and anesthesia. Midazolam was associated with impairment of performance on the TDT and DSST after premedication administration and 15 (TDT and DSST) and 30 (DSST) min after postanesthesia care unit (PACU) arrival. There were no differences in PACU time and time to discharge-readiness. In conclusion, midazolam premedication augments postoperative sedation in this population but does not prolong recovery times. The effectiveness of propranolol, a nonsedating anxiolytic premedication, was studied by monitoring preoperative anxiety and postoperative recovery of cognitive function in 92 healthy ASA physical status I females aged 15-42 yr undergoing outpatient dilatation and curettage (D&C) for therapeutic abortion. In a randomized double-blind design, patients received one of the following oral medications 1-1.5 hr preoperatively: (1) diazepam 10 mg (n = 31); (2) propranolol 80 mg (n = 31); (3) placebo (n = 30). Anxiety throughout the hospital stay was monitored using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Postoperative cognitive recovery was assessed using the digit span and Trieger tests. STAI anxiety levels were recorded on admission to hospital, immediately before entering the operating room, and two hours postoperatively. There was no difference among the anxiolytic properties of the three medications and all three patient groups showed a significant decrease in anxiety levels after administration of the medication. Tests of cognitive function after anaesthesia showed the fastest return to baseline status in patients receiving propranolol, possibly because beta adrenergic blockade blunted the autonomic signs of light anaesthesia and less anaesthetic was administered. None of the study premedications was demonstrated to have an anxiolytic advantage, but propranolol did offer a faster return of cognitive function in the postoperative period. It remains unclear whether epidural administration of hydromorphone results in spinal analgesia or clinical benefit when compared with intravenous administration. Therefore, we undertook this study to determine whether epidural administration of hydromorphone resulted in decreased opioid requirement, improved analgesia, reduced side effects, more rapid return of gastrointestinal function, or shorter duration of hospital stay than intravenous administration.
                Sixteen patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy were randomized in a double-blind manner to receive either intravenous or epidural hydromorphone via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for postoperative analgesia. All patients underwent a standardized combined epidural and general anesthetic and all received ketorolac for 72 h postoperatively. To decrease variability, patients were cared for according to a standardized protocol and were deemed ready for discharge according to prospectively defined criteria.
                Patients in the intravenous PCA group required approximately twice as much opioid than the epidural PCA group (P < 0.008), but there were no differences between groups in pain scores or patient satisfaction. Epidural administration resulted in a greater incidence of pruritus (P = 0.02). Gastrointestinal function recovered quickly in all patients with little variation, and there were no differences between groups. All patients were deemed ready for discharge by the third postoperative day, and removal of surgical drains was the last discharge criterion reached in all patients.
                Our results indicate that epidural administration of hydromorphone results in spinally mediated analgesia. However, epidural administration did not provide significant benefits in terms of postoperative analgesia, recovery of gastrointestinal function, or duration of hospitalization. Furthermore, we suggest that radical retropubic prostatectomy no longer be used as a model to assess the effects of analgesic technique on postoperative recovery, because control of discharge criteria revealed that hospital discharge was primarily dependent on removal of surgical drains. A double-blind trial of temazepam premedication for day cases was undertaken. Effective anxiolysis was recorded in the groups that received temazepam 10 or 20 mg and there was no prolongation of delayed recovery times as measured by memory test cards. All patients were discharged from the day unit 3 hours after the administration of general anaesthesia. The pre- and postoperative effects of oral diazepam (0.5 mg/kg), trimeprazine (4 mg/kg), pentobarbitone (3 mg/kg) and a placebo were compared in a randomized double-blind clinical trial in 149 children, aged one to ten years, undergoing adenotonsillectomy. The anaesthetic was standardised and each patient received intraoperative intramuscular papaveretum (0.3 mg/kg). Preoperative sedation was assessed in the ward before transfer onto the theatre trolley, on leaving the ward, on arrival on the theatre floor, on arrival in the induction room and on induction of anaesthesia. There was no significant difference in sedation between the four drug groups except for the placebo group which had a significantly greater unsatisfactory rating at the stage of induction of anaesthesia (P = 0.001). There were no differences in waking times between the diazepam, pentobarbitone and placebo groups, but the trimeprazine group's waking times were significantly prolonged (P less than 0.001). However, the trimeprazine group exhibited significantly less distress in the recovery unit (P = 0.02) and had half the incidence of vomiting (P less than 0.001) than did the other premedication groups. to investigate the effectiveness of a pharmacy discharge plan in elderly hospitalized patients.
                randomized controlled trial.
                we randomized patients aged 75 years and older on four or more medicines who had been discharged from three acute general and one long-stay hospital to a pharmacy intervention or usual care.
                the hospital pharmacist developed discharge plans which gave details of medication and support required by the patient. A copy was given to the patient and to all relevant professionals and carers. This was followed by a domiciliary assessment by a community pharmacist. In the control group, patients were discharged from hospital following standard procedures that included a discharge letter to the general practitioner listing current medications.
                the primary outcome was re-admission to hospital within 6 months. Secondary outcomes included the number of deaths, attendance at hospital outpatient clinics and general practice and proportion of days in hospital over the follow-up period, together with patients' general well-being, satisfaction with the service and knowledge of and adherence to prescribed medication.
                we recruited 362 patients, of whom 181 were randomized to each group. We collected hospital and general practice data on at least 91 and 72% of patients respectively at each follow-up point and interviewed between 43 and 90% of the study subjects. There were no significant differences between the groups in the proportion of patients re-admitted to hospital between baseline and 3 months or 3 and 6 months. There were no significant differences in any of the secondary outcomes.
                we found no evidence to suggest that the co-ordinated hospital and community pharmacy care discharge plans in elderly patients in this study influence outcomes. The use of cerebral monitoring may improve the ability of anesthesiologists to titrate anesthetic drugs. However, there is controversy regarding the impact of the alleged anesthetic-sparing effects of cerebral monitoring on the recovery process and patient outcome. We designed this prospective double-blinded, sham-controlled study to evaluate the impact of intraoperative monitoring with the electroencephalogram bispectral index (BIS) or auditory evoked potential (AEP) device on the usage of desflurane and the time to discharge from the recovery room, as well as on patient satisfaction with their anesthetic experience and recovery. Ninety healthy patients undergoing laparoscopic general surgery procedures using a standardized anesthetic technique were randomly assigned to one of three monitoring groups: standard clinical practice (control), BIS-guided, or AEP-guided. Both the BIS and AEP monitors were connected to all patients before induction of general anesthesia. In the control group, the anesthesiologists were not permitted to observe the BIS or AEP index values during the intraoperative period. In the BIS-guided group, the volatile anesthetic was titrated to maintain a BIS value in the range of 45-55. In the AEP-guided group, the targeted AEP index range was 15-20. The BIS and AEP indices, as well as end-tidal desflurane concentration, were recorded at 3-5 min intervals. Recovery times to awakening, tracheal extubation, fast-track score >or=12, and postanesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge criteria were recorded at 1-10 min intervals. In addition, patient satisfaction with anesthesia and quality of recovery were evaluated on 100- and 18-point scales, respectively, at 24 h after surgery. The AEP- and BIS-guided groups were administered significantly smaller average end-tidal desflurane concentrations than the control group (3.8 +/- 0.9 and 3.9 +/- 0.6 versus 4.7 +/- 1.7, respectively) (P < 0.01). Although the emergence times to eye opening, tracheal extubation, and obeying commands were consistently shorter in the AEP and BIS groups (6 +/- 4 and 6 +/- 5 versus 8 +/- 8 min; 6 +/- 5 and 6 +/- 4 versus 11 +/- 10 min; and 8 +/- 4 and 7 +/- 4 versus 12 +/- 9 min, respectively), only the extubation times were significantly different from the control group (P < 0.05). More importantly, the length of the PACU stay was significantly shorter in both the AEP- and BIS-guided groups (79 +/- 43 and 80 +/- 47 versus 108 +/- 58 min, respectively) (P < 0.05). The patients' quality of recovery was also significantly higher in the two monitored groups (15 +/- 2 versus 13 +/- 3 in the control group, P < 0.05). We concluded that cerebral monitoring with either the BIS or AEP devices reduced the maintenance anesthetic (desflurane) requirement, resulting in a shorter length of stay in the PACU and improved quality of recovery after laparoscopic surgery. However, there were no significant outcome differences between the two cerebral monitored groups.
                Compared with standard monitoring practices, use of an auditory evoked potential or bispectral index monitor to titrate the volatile anesthetic led to a significant reduction in the anesthetic requirement. The anesthetic-sparing effect of cerebral monitoring resulted in a shorter postanesthesia care unit stay and improved quality of recovery from the patient's perspective. To compare the analgesic and side effects of preemptively used epidural ketamine +bupivacaine, neostigmine +bupivacaine, and bupivacaine alone on postoperative analgesia after major abdominal surgery.
                Randomized, controlled study.
                Inpatient anesthesia at the department of surgery of a metropolitan hospital.
                30 ASA physical status I, II, and III patients scheduled for abdominal surgery.
                Group K received 1 mL (50 mg) ketamine and 5 mL (25 mg) bupivacaine epidurally, Group N received 1 mL (0.5 mg) neostigmine and 5 mL (25 mg) bupivacaine epidurally, and Group B received 1 mL saline and 5 mL (25 mg) bupivacaine epidurally 30 minutes before operation. All patients underwent anesthesia induction with thiopental and vecuronium; anesthesia was maintained with isoflorane and vecuronium. For postoperative analgesia, all patients received epidural morphine for 48 hours postoperatively.
                Standard monitoring included: 48 hours of analgesic requirement, visual analog scale (VAS), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rate (HR) in the 1st, 2nd, 6th, 12th, 24th, and 48th hours. Data were analyzed using Kruskall-Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests, with a p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. No significant differences were observed regarding MAP and HR among the groups during the study period. In Group N, VAS was significantly lower than Group K and Group B. The total opioid consumption in Group N was significantly lower than in Groups K and B in the first 48 hours after the operation.
                Preemptive neostigmine can be a good choice for postoperative analgesia. Analogous to the Bispectral Index (BIS) monitor, the auditory evoked potential monitor provides an electroencephalographic-derived index (AAI), which is alleged to correlate with the central nervous system depressant effects of anesthetic drugs. This clinical study was designed to test the hypothesis that intraoperative cerebral monitoring guided by either the BIS or the AAI value would facilitate recovery from general anesthesia compared with standard clinical monitoring practices alone in the ambulatory setting.
                Sixty consenting outpatients undergoing gynecologic laparoscopic surgery were randomly assigned to one of three study groups: (1) control (standard practice), (2) BIS guided, or (3) AAI guided. Anesthesia was induced with 1.5-2.5 mg/kg propofol and 1-1.5 microg/kg fentanyl given intravenously. Desflurane, 3%, in combination with 60% nitrous oxide in oxygen was administered for maintenance of general anesthesia. In the control group, the inspired desflurane concentration was varied based on standard clinical signs. In the BIS- and AAI-guided groups, the inspired desflurane concentrations were titrated to maintain BIS and AAI values in targeted ranges of 50-60 and 15-25, respectively. BIS and AAI values, hemodynamic variables, and the end-tidal desflurane concentration were recorded at 5-min intervals during the maintenance period. The emergence times and recovery times to achieve specific clinical endpoints were recorded at 1- to 10-min intervals. The White fast-track and modified Aldrete recovery scores were assessed on arrival in the PACU, and the quality of recovery score was evaluated at the time of discharge home.
                A positive correlation was found between the AAI and BIS values during the maintenance period. The average BIS and AAI values (mean +/- SD) during the maintenance period were significantly lower in the control group (BIS, 41 +/- 10; AAI, 11 +/- 6) compared with the BIS-guided (BIS, 57 +/- 14; AAI, +/- 11) and AAI-guided (BIS, 55 +/- 12; AAI, 20 +/- 10) groups. The end-tidal desflurane concentration was significantly reduced in the BIS-guided (2.7 +/- 0.9%) and AAI-guided (2.6 +/- 0.9%) groups compared with the control group (3.6 +/- 1.5%). The awakening (eye-opening) and discharge times were significantly shorter in the BIS-guided (7 +/- 3 and 132 +/- 39 min, respectively) and AAI-guided (6 +/- 2 and 128 +/- 39 min, respectively) groups compared with the control group (9 +/- 4 and 195 +/- 57 min, respectively). More importantly, the median [range] quality of recovery scores was significantly higher in the BIS-guided (18 [17-18]) and AAI-guided (18 [17-18]) groups when compared with the control group (16 [10-18]).
                Compared with standard anesthesia monitoring practice, adjunctive use of auditory evoked potential and BIS monitoring can improve titration of desflurane during general anesthesia, leading to an improved recovery profile after ambulatory surgery. Because no completely effective antiemetic exists for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), we hypothesize that a multimodal approach to management of PONV may reduce both vomiting and the need for rescue antiemetics in high-risk patients. After IRB approval, women undergoing outpatient laparoscopy were randomized to one of three groups. Group I (n = 60) was managed by using a predefined multimodal clinical care algorithm. Patients undergoing the same surgical procedure who received a standard balanced outpatient anesthetic with ondansetron 4 mg (Group II, n = 42) or placebo (Group III, n = 37) prophylaxis were chosen to establish baseline incidence of nausea and vomiting. None of the Group I patients vomited before discharge, compared with 7% in Group II (P = 0.07) and 22% in Group III (P = 0.0003). However, one patient (2%) in Group I required treatment for symptoms in the postanesthesia care unit, compared with 24% in Group II (P<0.0001) and 41% in Group III (P< 0.0001). Time to discharge-ready was significantly shorter in Group I (128, 118-139 min; mean, 95% confidence interval) versus Group II (162, 145-181 min; P = 0.0015) and Group III (192, 166-222 min; P = 0.0001). Patient satisfaction with control of PONV was not different between Group I and Group II. Return to normal daily activity and overall satisfaction were not different among groups. Multimodal management resulted in a 98% complete response rate and a 0% incidence of vomiting before discharge; however, this improvement did not result in an increased level of patient satisfaction when compared with routine monotherapy prophylaxis. We conclude that both multimodal management and routine monotherapy antiemetic prophylaxis resulted in an increased level of patient satisfaction than symptomatic treatment in this high-risk population. The bispectral index (BIS), a parameter derived from the electroencephalograph (EEG), has been shown to correlate with increasing sedation and loss of consciousness. This study determined whether addition of BIS monitoring to standard anesthetic practice results in improvements in the conduct of anesthesia or in patient outcomes.
                Three hundred two patients receiving a propofol-alfentanil-nitrous oxide anesthetic were studied at four institutions. Thirty-four patients were initially enrolled to determine preexisting anesthetic practice and patient outcomes at each institution. Subsequent patients were randomized to either standard clinical practice (SP group), or standard practice plus BIS monitoring (BIS group). In all patients, the anesthesiologist attempted to provide a stable anesthetic with the fastest possible recovery. BIS was recorded for all patients, but viewed only in the BIS group. In the BIS group, propofol infusions were adjusted to achieve a target BIS between 45-60, increasing to 60-75 during the final 15 min of the case. In the SP group, propofol dose adjustments were made based only on standard clinical signs. Drug use, intraoperative responses, and patient recovery parameters were recorded.
                Demographics were similar between groups. Compared with the SP group, patients in the BIS group required lower normalized propofol infusion rates (134 vs. 116 microg x kg[-1] x min[-1]; P < 0.001), were extubated sooner (11.22 vs. 7.25 min; P < 0.003), had a higher percentage of patients oriented on arrival to PACU (43% vs. 23%; P < 0.02), had better postanesthesia care unit (PACU) nursing assessments (P < 0.001), and became eligible for discharge sooner (37.77 vs. 31.70 min; P <0.04). There was no significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative responses between the groups.
                Titrating propofol with BIS monitoring during balanced anesthesia decreased propofol use and significantly improved recovery. Intraoperative course was not changed. These findings indicate that the use of BIS may be valuable in guiding the administration of propofol intraoperatively. Improvements in analgesia after major surgery may allow a more rapid recovery and shorter hospital stay. We performed a prospective randomized trial to study the effects of epidural analgesia on the length of hospital stay after coronary artery surgery. The anesthetic technique and postoperative mobilization were altered to facilitate early intensive care discharge and hospital discharge. Fifty patients received high (T1 to T4) thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) with ropivacaine 1% (4-mL bolus, 3-5 mL/h infusion), with fentanyl (100-microg bolus, 15-25 microg/h infusion) and a propofol infusion (6 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1)). Another 50 patients (the General Anesthesia group) received fentanyl 15 microg/kg and propofol (5 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1)), followed by IV morphine patient-controlled analgesia. The TEA group had lower visual analog scores with coughing postextubation (median, 0 vs 26 mm; P < 0.0001) and were extubated earlier (median hours [interquartile range], 3.2 [2.1-4.6] vs 6.7 [3.3-13.2]; P < 0.0001). More than half of all patients were discharged home on Postoperative Day 4 (24%) or 5 (33%), but there was no difference in the length of stay between the TEA group (median [interquartile range], Day 5 [5-6]) and the General Anesthesia group (median [interquartile range], Day 5 [4-7]). There were no differences in postoperative spirometry or chest radiograph changes or in markers for postoperative myocardial ischemia or infarction. No significant TEA-related complications occurred. In summary, TEA provided better analgesia and allowed earlier tracheal extubation but did not reduce the length of hospital stay after coronary artery surgery.
                We found that epidural analgesia was more effective than IV morphine for cardiac surgery. Epidural anesthesia also allowed earlier weaning from mechanical ventilation, but it did not affect hospital discharge time. Continuous passive motion after major knee surgery optimizes the functional prognosis but causes severe pain. The authors tested the hypothesis that postoperative analgesic techniques influence surgical outcome and the duration of convalescence.
                Before standardized general anesthesia, 56 adult scheduled for major knee surgery were randomly assigned to one of three groups, each to receive a different postoperative analgesic technique for 72 h: continuous epidural infusion, continuous femoral block, or intravenous patient-controlled morphine (dose, 1 mg; lockout interval, 7 min; maximum dose, 30 mg/4 h). The first two techniques were performed using a solution of 1% lidocaine, 0.03 mg/ml morphine, and 2 microg/ml clonidine administered at 0.1 ml x kg(-1) x h(-1). Pain was assessed at rest and during continuous passive motion using a visual analog scale. The early postoperative maximal amplitude of knee flexion was measured during continuous passive motion at 24 h and 48 h and compared with the target levels prescribed by the surgeon. To evaluate functional outcome, the maximal amplitudes were measured again on postoperative day 5, at hospital discharge (day 7), and at 1- and 3-month follow-up examinations. When the patients left the surgical ward, they were admitted to a rehabilitation center, where their length of stay depended on prospectively determined discharge criteria
                The continuous epidural infusion and continuous femoral block groups showed significantly lower visual analog scale scores at rest and during continuous passive motion compared with the patient-controlled morphine group. The early postoperative knee mobilization levels in both continuous epidural infusion and continuous femoral block groups were significantly closer to the target levels prescribed by the surgeon than in the patient-controlled morphine group. On postoperative day 7, these values were 90 degrees (60-100 degrees)(median and 25th-75th percentiles) in the continuous epidural infusion group, 90 degrees (60-100 degrees) in the continuous femoral block group, and 80 degrees (60-100 degrees) in the patient-controlled morphine group (P < 0.05). The durations of stay in the rehabilitation center were significantly shorter: 37 days (range, 30-45 days) in the continuous epidural infusion group, 40 days (range, 31-60 days) in the continuous femoral block group, and 50 days (range, 30-80 days) in the patient-controlled morphine group (P < 0.05). Side effects were encountered more frequently in the continuous epidural infusion group.
                Regional analgesic techniques improve early rehabilitation after major knee surgery by effectively controlling pain during continuous passive motion, thereby hastening convalescence. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the efficacy of ondansetron in controlling postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) when used prophylactically in patients undergoing routine dentoalveolar surgery performed under general anesthesia.
                This was a prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled evaluation. Fifty adult ASA I or II patients, requiring routine dentoalveolar surgery performed under general anesthesia, without a prior history of PONV, were randomly assigned to the experimental or control groups. Ondansetron (2.0 mL = 4.0 mg) or normal saline (2.0 mL) were administered intravenously before surgery. Age, gender, type of surgery, duration of surgery, anesthetic dosages, and PONV were evaluated. PONV was evaluated at time 0 (end of anesthesia) and at 30 and 60 minutes postoperatively. Nausea was evaluated using a visual analog scale (1, not nauseous; 5, about to vomit). Vomiting was assessed as a yes or no response. At 20 to 28 hours postoperatively, PONV was evaluated via a telephone call as a yes or no response, along with the number of episodes of nausea, vomiting, or both. Means and standard deviations were calculated for age, surgery, and anesthetics, and differences were assessed using an independent samples t-test. Differences for gender between the control and experimental groups were tested by a nonparametric chi-squared test. Differences between groups for nausea and vomiting were tested with a continuity correction chi-squared test. Differences were considered significant for a P < .05.
                No significant differences (P < .05) were found between the PONV groups for gender, duration of procedure, or anesthetic dosages. Statistically significant differences were noted in age and the type of surgical procedures performed. No statistically significant differences (P < .05) were noted between groups for nausea or vomiting.
                Based on the results of this study, PONV occurred in approximately 20% of patients (20% for nausea, 8% for vomiting). With the types of anesthetic agents and techniques used in this investigation, there were no significant differences between ondansetron and placebo for prophylaxis against PONV. One hundred adult female patients scheduled for outpatient laparoscopic procedures were studied. Each patient received intravenous premedication about 30 min before induction of anaesthesia. The premedications were given in a double-blind random order and were either a placebo, morphine (0.04 mg/kg), meperidine (0.35 mg/kg), fentanyl (0.75 microgram/kg) or sufentanil (0.15 microgram/kg). All patients received a standard anaesthetic regimen. Transient light-headedness was common following narcotic injections. Overall, sufentanil was superior to the placebo and to other narcotics in its ability to reduce preoperative anxiety and to provide more satisfactory induction, maintenance and recovery from anaesthesia. The incidence of postoperative nausea, vomiting and other side effects was not higher and discharge times were not longer after sufentanil compared to the placebo group. Complete recovery as assessed by telephone interview 24-48 h after the operation revealed no difference between the sufentanil and the other groups. The results of this study indicate that intravenous short-acting narcotics like fentanyl or sufentanil should be considered as an alternative premedicant for anxious patients who are scheduled for outpatient surgery.
We found no evidence of a difference in time to discharge from hospital, assessed by clinical criteria, in patients who received anxiolytic premedication. However, in view of the age and variety of anaesthetic techniques used and clinical heterogeneity between studies, inferences for current day case practice should be made with caution.