Environmental and economic impact of using increased fresh gas flow to reduce carbon dioxide absorbent consumption in the absence of inhalational anaesthetics.

BACKGROUND: Increasing fresh gas flow (FGF) to a circle breathing system reduces carbon dioxide (CO2) absorbent consumption. We assessed the environmental and economic impacts of this trade-off between gas flow and absorbent consumption when no inhalational anaesthetic agent is used. METHODS: A test lung with fixed CO2 inflow was ventilated via a circle breathing system of an anaesthetic machine (Dräger Primus or GE Aisys CS2) using an FGF of 1, 2, 4, or 6 L min-1. We recorded the time to exhaustion of the CO2 absorbent canister, defined as when inspired partial pressure of CO2 exceeded 0.3 kPa. For each FGF, we calculated the economic costs and the environmental impact associated with the manufacture of the CO2 absorbent canister and the supply of medical air and oxygen. Environmental impact was measured in 100 yr global-warming potential, analysed using a life cycle assessment 'cradle to grave' approach. RESULTS: Increasing FGF from 1 to 6 L min-1 was associated with up to 93% reduction in the combined running cost with minimal net change to the 100 yr global-warming potential. Most of the reduction in cost occurred between 4 and 6 L min-1. Removing the CO2 absorbent from the circle system, and further increasing FGF to control CO2 rebreathing, afforded minimal further economic benefit, but more than doubled the global-warming potential. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of inhalational anaesthetic agents, increasing FGF to 6 L min-1 reduces running cost compared with lower FGFs, with minimal impact to the environment.

Predicting cost of inhalational anesthesia at low fresh gas flows: impact of a new generation carbon dioxide absorbent.

It is well known that low fresh gas flows result in lower cost of inhalational agents. A new generation of carbon dioxide absorbents allows low flow anesthesia with all anesthetics but these new compounds are more expensive. This study examines the cost of inhalational anesthesia at different fresh gas flows combined with the cost of absorbent. The cost of sevoflurane and desflurane is lower at low fresh gas flows. Paradoxically the cost of isoflurane is cheaper at 2 L/min than at lower fresh gas flows due to increased cost of carbon dioxide absorbent. Therefore low fresh gas flows should be used when feasible with sevoflurane and desflurane, but higher fresh gas flows up to 2 L/min may be more economical with isoflurane during maintenance phase of anesthesia.

Sevoflurane Consumption During Inhalational Induction in Children: A Randomized Comparison of Minute Ventilation-Based Techniques With Standard Fixed Fresh Gas Flow Technique.

This study was done to ascertain the optimum fresh gas flow (FGF) offering the best balance between rapid induction and minimal waste in pediatric patients. Forty-five children (weighing 10-20 kg) undergoing elective procedures under general anesthesia were randomly assigned into 3 groups: 0.5 minute ventilation (MV), MV, and S (FGF = 6 L/min). After priming the pediatric closed circuit, anesthesia was induced using a face mask with 8% sevoflurane in 100% oxygen (Draeger Primus Vista 120 anesthesia machine) at FGF-determined MV per group allocation. After loss of eyelash reflex (time 1 [T1]), intravenous cannulation (T2) and laryngeal mask airway (LMA) placement (T3) were done. Total sevoflurane consumed during induction (measured using logbook function) was the primary outcome. The cost of sevoflurane, any reflex movement, tachycardia (heart rate change > 20%), or additional propofol boluses required were also recorded. Sevoflurane consumption (3.8 vs 5.8 vs 9.2 mL) and cost of sevoflurane (104.2 vs 199.4 vs 312.8 rupees) were lowest in group 0.5 MV (P < .001). There was no difference in hemodynamic parameters, movement on cannulation/LMA insertion, and rescue propofol boluses required. For pediatric sevoflurane induction, half the MV-based FGF provided similar anesthetic conditions for LMA insertion with minimum sevoflurane consumption.

The Effect of Erector Spinae Plane Block on Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Anesthesia: Analysis of Opioid Consumption, Sevoflurane Consumption, and Cost.

Background: Erector spinae plane (ESP) block has been increasingly suggested for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) as a part of multimodal analgesia in many studies. However, there is not any study that investigated the perioperative effects of ESP block on anesthetic agent consumption and cost of LC anesthesia. This is the first study that evaluates the effect of ESP block in terms of cost-effectiveness, intraoperative consumption of inhalation agents, and perioperative consumption of opioids. Materials and Methods: In this prospective observational study, 81 patients who underwent LC were included. Patients were divided into two groups: In Group ESP (n = 39) bilateral ultrasound-guided ESP block was performed in preoperative period and in Group non-ESP (n = 42) ESP block was not performed. After standard general anesthesia protocol, anesthesia was maintained with 2% sevoflurane in 50% air and 50% oxygen with controlled ventilation in both groups. All patients were monitored with electrocardiography, noninvasive blood pressure, pulse oximetry, end-tidal carbon dioxide, and bispectral index. The consumption of sevoflurane and opioids in the intraoperative and postoperative 24 hours was recorded. The costs of drugs were determined by multiplying total consumed amounts with unit prices. Results: The costs and the consumed amounts of remifentanyl, sevoflurane, and tramadol were significantly higher in non-ESP group in the perioperative period (respectively, P < .001, P = .01, and P < .001). Conclusions: ESP block for LC decreased the consumed amount and cost of inhaled agents and opioids in the perioperative period.

Estimating the Impact of Carbon Dioxide Absorbent Performance Differences on Absorbent Cost During Low-Flow Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Reducing fresh gas flow when using a circle anesthesia circuit is the most effective strategy for reducing both inhaled anesthetic vapor cost and waste. As fresh gas flow is reduced, the amount of exhaled gas rebreathed increases, but the utilization of carbon dioxide absorbent increases as well. Reducing fresh gas flow may not make economic sense if the increased cost of absorbent utilization exceeds the reduced cost of anesthetic vapor. The primary objective of this study was to determine the minimum fresh gas flow at which absorbent costs do not exceed vapor savings. Another objective is to provide a qualitative insight into the factors that influence absorbent performance as fresh gas flow is reduced. METHODS: A mathematical model was developed to compare the vapor savings with the cost of carbon dioxide absorbent as a function of fresh gas flow. Parameters of the model include patient size, unit cost of vapor and carbon dioxide absorbent, and absorbent capacity and efficiency. Boundaries for fresh gas flow were based on oxygen consumption or a closed-circuit condition at the low end and minute ventilation to approximate an open-circuit condition at the high end. Carbon dioxide production was estimated from oxygen consumption assuming a respiratory quotient of 0.8. RESULTS: For desflurane, the cost of carbon dioxide absorbent did not exceed vapor savings until fresh gas flow was almost equal to closed-circuit conditions. For sevoflurane, as fresh gas flow is reduced, absorbent costs increase more slowly than vapor costs decrease so that total costs are still minimized for a closed circuit. Due to the low cost of isoflurane, even with the most effective absorbent, the rate of absorbent costs increase more rapidly than vapor savings as fresh gas flow is reduced, so that an open circuit is least expensive. The total cost of vapor and absorbent is still lowest for isoflurane when compared with the other agents. CONCLUSIONS: The relative costs of anesthetic vapor and carbon dioxide absorbent as fresh gas flow is reduced are dependent on choice of anesthetic vapor and performance of the carbon dioxide absorbent. Absorbent performance is determined by the product selected and strategy for replacement. Clinicians can maximize the performance of absorbents by replacing them based on the appearance of inspired carbon dioxide rather than the indicator. Even though absorbent costs exceed vapor savings as fresh gas flow is reduced, isoflurane is still the lowest cost choice for the environmentally sound practice of closed-circuit anesthesia.

Provider Education and Vaporizer Labeling Lead to Reduced Anesthetic Agent Purchasing With Cost Savings and Reduced Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

Anesthetic agents are known greenhouse gases with hundreds to thousands of times the global warming impact compared with carbon dioxide. We sought to mitigate the negative environmental and financial impacts of our practice in the perioperative setting through multidisciplinary staff engagement and provider education on flow rate reduction and volatile agent choice. These efforts led to a 64% per case reduction in carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (163 kg in Fiscal Year 2012, compared with 58 kg in Fiscal Year 2015), as well as a cost savings estimate of $25,000 per month.

Comparison of low-fresh gas flow technique to standard technique of sevoflurane induction in children-A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although sevoflurane is preferred for inhalational induction in children, financial and environmental costs remain major limitations. The aim of this study was to determine if the use of low-fresh gas flow during inhalational induction with sevoflurane could significantly reduce agent consumption, without adversely affecting induction conditions. METHODS: After institutional ethical committee approval, 50 children, aged 1-5 years, undergoing ophthalmic procedures under general anesthesia, were randomized into two groups-standard induction (Group S) and low-flow induction (Group L). A pediatric circle system with 1 L reservoir bag was primed with 8% sevoflurane in oxygen at 6 L min-1 for 30 seconds before beginning induction. In Group S, fresh gas flow was maintained at 6 L min-1 until the end of induction. In Group L, fresh gas flow was reduced to 1 L min-1 after applying facemask (time = T0). In both groups, sevoflurane was reduced to 5% after loss of eyelash reflex (T1). Once adequate depth of anesthesia was achieved (regular respiration, loss of muscle tone, and absence of movement to trapezius squeeze), intravenous access was secured (T2), followed by insertion of an appropriately sized LMA-Classic™ (T3). Heart rate and endtidal sevoflurane concentration were measured at each of the above time points, and at 15 seconds following laryngeal mask airway insertion (T4). The total amount of sevoflurane consumed during induction was recorded. RESULTS: Sevoflurane consumption was significantly lower in Group L (4.17 ± 0.70 mL) compared to Group S (8.96 ± 1.11 mL) (mean difference 4.79 [95% CI = 4.25-5.33] mL; P < 0.001). Time to successful laryngeal mask airway insertion was similar in both groups. There were no significant differences in heart rate, incidence of reflex tachycardia, or need for rescue propofol. CONCLUSION: Induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane using low-fresh gas flow is effective in reducing sevoflurane consumption, without compromising induction time and conditions.

Efficacy of Malignant Hyperthermia Association of the United States-Recommended Methods of Preparation for Malignant Hyperthermia-Susceptible Patients Using Dräger Zeus Anesthesia Workstations and Associated Costs.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to assess the efficacy and cost of Malignant Hyperthermia Association of the United States-recommended methods for preparing Dräger Zeus anesthesia workstations (AWSs) for the malignant hyperthermia-susceptible patient. METHODS: We studied washout profiles of sevoflurane, isoflurane, and desflurane in 3 Zeus AWS following 3 preparation methods. AWS was primed with 1.2 minimum alveolar concentration anesthetic for 2 hours using 2 L/min fresh gas flow, 500 mL tidal volume, and 12/min respiratory rate. Two phases of washout were performed: high flow (10 L/min) until anesthetic concentration was <5 parts per million (ppm) for 20 minutes and then low flow (3 L/min) for 20 minutes to identify the rebound effect. Preparation methods are as follows: method 1 (M1), changing disposables (breathing circuit, soda lime, CO2 line, and water traps); method 2 (M2), M1 plus replacing the breathing system with an autoclaved one; and method 3 (M3), M1 plus mounting 2 activated charcoal filters on respiratory limbs. Primary outcomes are as follows: time to obtain anesthetic concentration <5 ppm in the high-flow phase, peak anesthetic concentrations in the low-flow phase, and for M3 only, peak anesthetic concentration after 70 minutes of low-flow phase, when activated charcoal filters are removed. Secondary outcomes are as follows: cost analysis of time and resources to obtain anesthetic concentration <5 ppm in each method and a vapor-free Zeus AWS. Sensitivity analyses were performed using alternative assumptions regarding the costs and the malignant hyperthermia-susceptible caseload per year. RESULTS: Primary outcomes were as follows: M3 instantaneously decreased anesthetic concentration to <1 ppm with minimal impact of low-flow phase. M1 (median, 88 minutes; 95% confidence interval [CI], 69-112 minutes) was greater than M2 (median, 11 minutes; 95% CI, 9-15 minutes). Means of peak rebound anesthetic concentrations in M1, M2, and M3 were 15, 6, and 1 ppm, respectively (P < .001). Anesthetic concentration increased 33-fold (95% CI, 21-50) after removing charcoal filters (from 0.7 to 20 ppm). The choice of anesthetic agents did not impact the results. Secondary outcomes were as follows: M3 was the lowest cost when the cost of lost operating room (OR) time due to washout was included, and M1 was the lowest cost when it was not included. When the cost of lost OR time due to washout was considered the estimated cost/case of M3 was US $360 (M1, US $2670; M2, US $969; and a "vapor-free" Zeus AWS was US $930). The OR time and equipment costs represent the largest differentiators among the methods. CONCLUSIONS: Institutions in which demand for OR time has exceeded capacity should consider M3, and institutions with surplus OR capacity should consider M1.

Cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring: a prospective, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We compared cost-effectiveness of anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane or propofol with and without additional monitoring, in the clinical setting of ear-nose-throat surgery. METHODS: One hundred twenty adult patients were randomized to four groups. In groups SEVO and SEVO+ anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane, in group SEVO+ with additional bispectral index (BIS) and train-of-four (TOF) monitoring. In groups PROP and PROP+ anesthesia was maintained with propofol, in group PROP+ with additional BIS and TOF monitoring. RESULTS: Total cost of anesthesia per hour was greater in group SEVO+ compared to SEVO [€ 19.95(8.53) vs. 12.15(5.32), p <  0.001], and in group PROP+ compared to PROP (€ 22.11(8.08) vs. 13.23(4.23), p <  0.001]. Time to extubation was shorter in group SEVO+ compared to SEVO [11.1(4.7) vs. 14.5(3.9) min, p = 0.002], and in PROP+ compared to PROP [12.6(5.4) vs. 15.2(4.7) min, p <  0.001]. Postoperatively, arterial blood pressure returned to its initial values sooner in groups SEVO+ and PROP+. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated that the use of BIS and TOF monitoring decreased the total cost of anesthesia drugs and hastened postoperative recovery. However, in our circumstances, these were associated with higher disposables costs. Detailed cost analysis and further investigations are needed to identify patient populations who would benefit most from additional monitoring. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02920749 . Retrospectively registered (date of registration September 2016).

Sources of Variation in Anesthetic Drug Costs.

BACKGROUND: Increasing attention has been focused on health care expenditures, which include anesthetic-related drug costs. Using data from 2 large academic medical centers, we sought to identify significant contributors to anesthetic drug cost variation. METHODS: Using anesthesia information management systems, we calculated volatile and intravenous drug costs for 8 types of inpatient surgical procedures performed from July 1, 2009, to December 31, 2011. For each case, we determined patient age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status, gender, institution, case duration, in-room provider, and attending anesthesiologist. These variables were then entered into 2 fixed-effects linear regression models, both with logarithmically transformed case cost as the outcome variable. The first model included duration, attending anesthesiologist, patient age, ASA physical status, and patient gender as independent variables. The second model included case type, institution, patient age, ASA physical status, and patient gender as independent variables. When all variables were entered into 1 model, redundancy analyses showed that case type was highly correlated (R = 0.92) with the other variables in the model. More specifically, a model that included case type was no better at predicting cost than a model without the variable, as long as that model contained the combination of attending anesthesiologist and case duration. Therefore, because we were interested in determining the effect both variables had on cost, 2 models were created instead of 1. The average change in cost resulting from each variable compared to the average cost of the reference category was calculated by first exponentiating the ß coefficient and subtracting 1 to get the percent difference in cost. We then multiplied that value by the mean cost of the associated reference group. RESULTS: A total of 5504 records were identified, of which 4856 were analyzed. The median anesthetic drug cost was $38.45 (25th percentile = $23.23, 75th percentile = $63.82). The majority of the variation was not described by our models-35.2% was explained in the model containing case duration, and 32.3% was explained in the model containing case type. However, the largest sources of variation our models identified were attending anesthesiologist, case type, and procedure duration. With all else held constant, the average change in cost between attending anesthesiologists ranged from a cost decrease of $41.25 to a cost increase of $95.67 (10th percentile = -$19.96, 90th percentile = +$20.20) when compared to the provider with the median value for mean cost per case. The average change in cost between institutions was significant but minor ($5.73). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the variation was not described by the models, possibly indicating high per-case random variation. The largest sources of variation identified by our models included attending anesthesiologist, procedure type, and case duration. The difference in cost between institutions was statistically significant but was minor. While many prior studies have found significant savings resulting from cost-reducing interventions, our findings suggest that because the overall cost of anesthetic drugs was small, the savings resulting from interventions focused on the clinical practice of attending anesthesiologists may be negligible, especially in institutions where access to more expensive drugs is already limited. Thus, cost-saving efforts may be better focused elsewhere.

Use and perception of nitrous oxide sedation by French dentists in private practice: a national survey.

AIM: The aim of this national survey was to record the use of nitrous oxide and the perceptions of French dental practitioners to this form of sedation. The use of nitrous oxide sedation (NOS) has been authorised in private dental practice in France since December 2009 but, to date, no study implementing both quantitative and qualitative methods has explored such use. METHODS: The data were collected using a Google Forms questionnaire. A mixed methodology was used for data analysis: a quantitative approach to explore the use of conscious sedation and a qualitative thematic approach (using Nvivo software) to determine the practitioner's perception of it. RESULTS: Responses were collected from 225 practitioners (19% of the target population of 1185). Most of the responders were trained in NOS use in private dental clinics. Seventy-three percent of those who trained privately actually used NOS, compared to 53% of those trained at university (p-value = 0.0052). Above all, NOS was used for children requiring restorative dentistry. The average price of the sedation was 50 Euros and it lasted, on average, for 37 min. The qualitative and thematic analysis revealed the financial and technical difficulties of implementing NOS in private practice. However, it also showed the benefits and pleasure associated with NOS use. CONCLUSION: This statistical survey of French dental practitioners offers an insight of the current state of the use of conscious sedation with nitrous oxide in private general dental practice in France. It also includes the first report of dental practitioners' perceptions of NOS use and may lead to a better understanding of the reasons why sedation is sometimes not used in private practice.

COMPARISON OF ISOFLURANE AND SEVOFLURANE FOR SHORT-TERM ANESTHESIA IN MEERKATS (SURICATA SURICATTA)-ARE THERE BENEFITS THAT OUTWEIGH COSTS?

Meerkats ( Suricata suricatta ) are routinely anesthetized with isoflurane in zoo and field settings. Twenty healthy adult meerkats of mixed age and sex held in the Zoological Society of London's collection were anesthetized with 4% isoflurane by face mask for routine health examinations. The procedure was repeated 5 mo later in the same group of animals utilizing sevoflurane at 5% for induction, and again 3 mo later with sevoflurane at 6.5% for induction to approximate equipotency with isoflurane. The speed and quality of induction and recovery were compared between the two volatile anesthetic agents. There was no statistically significant difference in the speed of induction across any of the anesthetic regimes. There was a significant difference in recovery times between isoflurane and 6.5% sevoflurane (427 ± 218 and 253 ± 65 sec, respectively [mean ± SD]). Under the conditions of this study, sevoflurane at 6.5% induction dose resulted in better quality induction and recovery than sevoflurane at 5% induction or isoflurane. The mean heart and respiratory rates during anesthesia were higher using 5% sevoflurane for induction but there was no significant difference in either rate between isoflurane and sevoflurane used at a 6.5% induction dose. This study suggests that sevoflurane at a dose of 6.5% for induction and 4% for maintenance is a safe and effective anesthetic agent in healthy adult meerkats. Rapid return to normal behavior after anesthesia is important in all zoo species but particularly so in animals with a complex social and hierarchical structure such as meerkats. For this species, the advantage afforded by the speed of recovery with sevoflurane may offset the cost in certain circumstances.

Target-controlled inhalation anaesthesia: A cost-benefit analysis based on the cost per minute of anaesthesia by inhalation.

BACKGROUND: End-tidal target-controlled inhalational anaesthesia (TCIA) with halogenated agents (HA) provides a faster and more accurately titrated anaesthesia as compared to manually-controlled anaesthesia. This study aimed to measure the macro-economic cost-benefit ratio of TCIA as compared to manually-controlled anaesthesia. METHODS: This retrospective and descriptive study compared direct drug spending between two hospitals before 2011 and then after the replacement of three of six anaesthesia machines with TCIA mode machines in 2012 (Aisys carestation®, GE). The direct costs were obtained from the pharmacy department and the number and duration of the anaesthesia procedures from the computerized files of the hospital. RESULTS: The cost of halogenated agents was reduced in the hospital equipped with an Aisys carestation® by 13% as was the cost of one minute of anaesthesia by inhalation (€0.138 and €0.121/min between 2011 and 2012). The extra cost of the implementation of the 3 anaesthesia machines could be paid off with the resulting savings over 6 years. DISCUSSION: TCIA appears to have a favourable cost-benefit ratio. Despite a number of factors, which would tend to minimise the saving and increase costs, we still managed to observe a 13% savings. Shorter duration of surgery, type of induction as well as the way HA concentration is targeted may influence the savings results obtained.

$1.8 Million and counting: how volatile agent education has decreased our spending $1000 per day.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Volatile anesthetic agents comprise a substantial portion of every hospital's pharmacy budget. Challenged with an initiative to lower anesthetic drug expenditures, we developed an education-based intervention focused on reducing volatile anesthetic costs while preserving access to all available volatile anesthetics. When postintervention evaluation demonstrated a dramatic year-over-year reduction in volatile agent acquisition costs, we undertook a retrospective analysis of volatile anesthetic purchasing data using time series analysis to determine the impact of our educational initiative. DESIGN/SETTING: We obtained detailed volatile anesthetic purchasing data from the Central Supply of Wake Forest Baptist Health from 2007 to 2014 and integrated these data with the time course of our educational intervention. PATIENTS: Aggregate volatile anesthetic purchasing data were analyzed for 7 consecutive fiscal years. INTERVENTION: The educational initiative emphasized tissue partition coefficients of volatile anesthetics in adipose tissue and muscle and their impact on case management. MEASUREMENTS: We used an interrupted time series analysis of monthly cost per unit data using autoregressive integrated moving average modeling, with the monthly cost per unit being the amount spent per bottle of anesthetic agent per month. MAIN RESULTS: The cost per unit decreased significantly after the intervention (t=-6.73, P<.001). The autoregressive integrated moving average model predicted that the average cost per unit decreased $48 after the intervention, with 95% confidence interval of $34 to $62. As evident from the data, the purchasing of desflurane and sevoflurane decreased, whereas that of isoflurane increased. CONCLUSIONS: An educational initiative focused solely on the selection of volatile anesthetic agent per case significantly reduced volatile anesthetic expense at a tertiary medical center. This approach appears promising for application in other hospitals in the rapidly evolving, value-added health care environment. We were able to accomplish this with instruction on tissue partition coefficients and each agent's individual cost per MAC-hour delivered.

Economic and Environmental Considerations During Low Fresh Gas Flow Volatile Agent Administration After Change to a Nonreactive Carbon Dioxide Absorbent.

BACKGROUND: Reducing fresh gas flow (FGF) during general anesthesia reduces costs by decreasing the consumption of volatile anesthetics and attenuates their contribution to greenhouse gas pollution of the environment. The sevoflurane FGF recommendations in the Food and Drug Administration package insert relate to concern over potential toxicity from accumulation in the breathing circuit of compound A, a by-product of the reaction of the volatile agent with legacy carbon dioxide absorbents containing strong alkali such as sodium or potassium hydroxide. Newer, nonreactive absorbents do not produce compound A, making such restrictions moot. We evaluated 4 hypotheses for sevoflurane comparing intervals before and after converting from a legacy absorbent (soda lime) to a nonreactive absorbent (Litholyme): (1) intraoperative FGF would be reduced; (2) sevoflurane consumption per minute of volatile agent administration would be reduced; (3) cost savings due to reduced sevoflurane consumption would (modestly) exceed the incremental cost of the premium absorbent; and (4) residual wastage in discarded sevoflurane bottles would be <1%. METHODS: Inspired carbon dioxide (PICO2), expired carbon dioxide, oxygen, air, and nitrous oxide FGF, inspired volatile agent concentrations (FiAgent), and liquid volatile agent consumption were extracted from our anesthesia information management system for 8 4 week intervals before and after the absorbent conversion. Anesthesia providers were notified by e-mail and announcements at Grand Rounds about the impending change and were encouraged to reduce their average intraoperative sevoflurane FGF to 1.25 L/min. Personalized e-mail reports were sent every 4 weeks throughout the study period regarding the average intraoperative FGF (i.e., from surgery begin to surgery end) for each agent. Batch means methods were used to compare FGF, volatile agent consumption, net cost savings, and residual sevoflurane left in bottles to be discarded in the trash after filling vaporizers. The time from reaching a PICO2 = 3 mm Hg for 3 minutes until agent exhaustion (PICO2 = 5 mm Hg for 5 minutes) was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of N = 20,235 cases were analyzed (80.2% sevoflurane, 15.1% desflurane, and 4.7% isoflurane). Intraoperative FGF was reduced for cases in which sevoflurane was administered by 435 mL/min (95% confidence interval [CI], 391 to 479 mL/min; P < 10). Hypothesis 1 was accepted. Sevoflurane consumption per minute of administration decreased by 0.039 mL/min (95% CI, 0.029 to 0.049 mL/min; P < 10) after the change to the nonreactive absorbent. Hypothesis 2 was accepted. The difference in mean cost for the sum of the sevoflurane and absorbent purchases for each of the 10 4-week intervals before and after the absorbent switch was -$293 per 4-week interval (95% CI, -$2853 to $2266; P = 0.81). Hypothesis 3 was rejected. The average amount of residual sevoflurane per bottle was 0.67 ± 0.06 mL (95% CI, 0.54 to 0.81 mL per bottle; P < 10 vs 2.5 mL). Hypothesis 4 was accepted. Once the PICO2 reached 3 mm Hg for at least 3 consecutive minutes, the absorbent became exhausted within 95 minutes in most (i.e., >50%) canisters. CONCLUSIONS: We showed that an anesthesia department can transition to a premium, nonreactive carbon dioxide absorbent in a manner that is at least cost neutral by reducing FGF below the lower flow limits recommended in the sevoflurane package insert. This was achieved, in part, by electronically monitoring PICO2, automatically notifying the anesthesia technicians when to change the absorbent, and by providing personalized feedback via e-mail to the anesthesia providers.

Ether in the developing world: rethinking an abandoned agent.

BACKGROUND: The first true demonstration of ether as an inhalation anesthetic was on October 16, 1846 by William T.G. Morton, a Boston dentist. Ether has been replaced completely by newer inhalation agents and open drop delivery systems have been exchanged for complicated vaporizers and monitoring systems. Anesthesia in the developing world, however, where lack of financial stability has halted the development of the field, still closely resembles primitive anesthetics. DISCUSSION: In areas where resources are scarce, patients are often not given supplemental intraoperative analgesia. While halothane provides little analgesia, ether provides excellent intra-operative pain control that can extend for several hours into the postoperative period. An important barrier to the widespread use of ether is availability. With decreasing demand, production of the inexpensive inhalation agent has fallen. Ether is inexpensive to manufacture, and encouraging increased production at a local level would help developing nations to cut costs and become more self-sufficient.

A simple intervention to reduce the anesthetic pharmacy budget; the effect of price list stickers placed on vaporizers.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The study objective is to investigate the effects of a simple price list sticker placed on vaporizers on anesthetic use and costs. The price list only showed the cost per hour of the annually most expensive drugs, which had a low-cost alternative. DESIGN: The design is a prospective database study with historical controls. SETTING: The setting is at operating rooms. PATIENTS: All patients are undergoing a surgical procedure under anesthesia in both study periods, except cardiothoracic and day care patients. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention is application of a price list sticker on the vaporizers. MEASUREMENTS: Monthly cost and amount of anesthetic agents used during the 9 months before and after the intervention. MAIN RESULTS: After application of the price stickers, the use of both the annually most expensive agents and the anesthetic budget decreased substantially. Most notable was a decrease of 28% in the use of sevoflurane. CONCLUSIONS: Price sticker on vaporizers may be an effective, simple, and cheap method to reduce anesthetic costs.

Changing patterns in volatile anaesthetic agent consumption over seven years in Victorian public hospitals.

Evidence-based choices of volatile agents can increase health cost efficiencies. In this pharmaco-economic study, we evaluated the trends and costs of volatile agent use in Australian public hospitals. The total number of volatile agent (isoflurane, sevoflurane and desflurane) bottles ordered and inflation-adjusted costs were collected from 65 Victorian public hospitals from 2005 to 2011. Environmental costs were measured through the 100-year global warming potential index as carbon dioxide equivalents. During this time period, the aggregate inflation-adjusted expenditure was $39,209,878. Time series analysis showed that bottles of isoflurane ordered decreased by 419/year (99% confidence interval (CI): -603 to -235); costs decreased by $56,017/year (99% CI: -$93,243 to -$18,791). Bottles of sevoflurane increased by 1,330/year (99% CI: 1141 to 1,519); costs decreased by $423,3573/year (99% CI: -$720,030 to -112,783). Bottles of desflurane increased by 726/year (99% CI: 288 to 1,164); costs increased by $171,578/year (99% CI: $136,951 to $206,205). The amount of calculated greenhouse gas emissions released into the atmosphere over this period was 37,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents, with isoflurane contributing 6%, sevoflurane 17%, and desflurane 77% of this total. In conclusion, isoflurane is no longer being used in the majority of Victorian public hospitals, with sevoflurane and desflurane remaining as the primary volatile agents, utilised respectively at a ratio of 2.2 to 1, and costs at 0.8 to 1.