Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:14:05.431Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Inhalational versus intravenous induction. A survey of emergency anaesthetic practice in the United Kingdom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 August 2006

E. W. Moore
Affiliation:
University of Liverpool, The Duncan Building, Daulby Street, Liverpool L69 3GA, UK
M. W. Davies
Affiliation:
Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Prescot Street, Liverpool L7 8XP, UK
Get access

Abstract

A survey was constructed to ascertain the views of The Royal College of Anaesthetists tutors regarding the acceptability of inhalational induction with sevoflurane for emergency anaesthesia. A questionnaire was sent to all tutors asking them to indicate their preferred choice of anaesthetic technique, and whether they believed inhalation induction with sevoflurane to be acceptable, in each of four scenarios: acute epiglottis; bleeding after tonsillectomy; appendicitis; and laparotomy in the shocked patient. Two hundred and sixty-two (89%) completed questionnaires were received from 294 college tutors. We have shown that the majority of The Royal College of Anaesthetists tutors would use sevoflurane for patients with an acutely compromised airway. One in four college tutors would accept the use of sevoflurane for a shocked patient for laparotomy. Anaesthetists who manage critically ill patients with an inhalational induction should be reassured by the fact, that a significant proportion of their colleagues would find this technique acceptable.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
2000 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)