Comparison between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in the intensive care unit: patient and clinician perceptions
The α2 agonist dexmedetomidine is a new sedative and analgesic agent which is licensed in the USA for post-operative intensive care sedation. We compared dexmedetomidine with propofol in patients requiring sedation in intensive care. Twenty adult patients expected to require a minimum of 8 h artific...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA 2001-11, Vol.87 (5), p.684-690 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 690 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 684 |
container_title | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA |
container_volume | 87 |
creator | Venn, R.M. Grounds, R.M. |
description | The α2 agonist dexmedetomidine is a new sedative and analgesic agent which is licensed in the USA for post-operative intensive care sedation. We compared dexmedetomidine with propofol in patients requiring sedation in intensive care. Twenty adult patients expected to require a minimum of 8 h artificial ventilation after surgery were randomized to receive sedation with either dexmedetomidine or propofol infusions. Additional analgesia, if required, was provided by an alfentanil infusion. Depth of sedation was monitored using both the Ramsay sedation score (RSS) and the bispectral index (BIS). Cardiovascular, respiratory, biochemical and haematological data were obtained. Patients’ perceptions of their intensive care stay were assessed using the Hewitt questionnaire. Sedation was equivalent in the two groups [median (interquartile range): RSS, propofol group 5 (4–5), dexmedetomidine group 5 (4–6) (P=0.68); BIS, propofol group 53 (41–64), dexmedetomidine group 46 (36–58); P=0.32], but the propofol group received three times more alfentanil compared with patients sedated with dexmedetomidine [2.5 (2.2–2.9) mg h−1 versus 0.8 (0.65–1.2) mg h−1 (P=0.004)]. No differences were found in arterial pressures between the groups, but heart rate was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group [mean (sd) 75 (6) vs 90 (4) beats min−1]. Extubation times were similar and rapid with the use of both sedative agents [median (range) 28 (20–50) and 29 (15–50) min (P=0.63) respectively for the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups]. No adverse events related to the sedative infusions occurred in either group. Despite ventilation and intubation, patients sedated with dexmedetomidine could be easily roused to cooperate with procedures (e.g. physiotherapy, radiology) without showing irritation. From the clinician's and patient's perspectives, dexmedetomidine is a safe and acceptable sedative agent for those requiring intensive care. The rate pressure product is reduced in patients receiving dexmedetomidine, which may protect against myocardial ischaemia. Dexmedetomidine reduces the requirement for opioid analgesia. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/bja/87.5.684 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71269908</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/bja/87.5.684</oup_id><els_id>S0007091217366096</els_id><sourcerecordid>92649378</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c565t-a9b46964e0f51572b0c97ee96cc73630f4202406bb6e8ea041c1128c85ac1a473</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0c9rFTEQB_BFFPus3jxLENSL-5rs5qc3eWirFL1UEC8hm53FPHeTbZKt1b_e1H1YEMHTXD4zk8y3qh4TvCVYtSfd3pxIsWVbLumdakOoIDUXgtytNhhjUWNFmqPqQUp7jIloFLtfHREihWREbKqfuzDNJroUPOogfwfwqIfrCXrIYXK984CM79EcwxyGMKIhRJSgN9mVDudR_gqlZPDJXQGyJgJavMuv0FwI-Py7247OO-uMRzNEC_NNc3pY3RvMmODRoR5Xn96-udid1ecfT9_tXp_XlnGWa6M6yhWngAdGmGg6bJUAUNxa0fIWD7TBDcW86zhIMJgSS0gjrWTGEkNFe1w9X-eWP1wukLKeXLIwjsZDWJIWpOFKYVng07_gPizRl7dpooQsSygr6OWKbAwpRRj0HN1k4g9NsL4JRJdAtBSa6RJI4U8OM5euHPUWHxIo4NkBmGTNOETjrUu3jmKppODFvVhdWOb_raxX6VKG6z_WxG-ai1Ywffb5i26alvEPp-_1RfF89VBCuHIQdbIlOQu9i2Cz7oP796JfGGfC2g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>197824045</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in the intensive care unit: patient and clinician perceptions</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Venn, R.M. ; Grounds, R.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Venn, R.M. ; Grounds, R.M.</creatorcontrib><description>The α2 agonist dexmedetomidine is a new sedative and analgesic agent which is licensed in the USA for post-operative intensive care sedation. We compared dexmedetomidine with propofol in patients requiring sedation in intensive care. Twenty adult patients expected to require a minimum of 8 h artificial ventilation after surgery were randomized to receive sedation with either dexmedetomidine or propofol infusions. Additional analgesia, if required, was provided by an alfentanil infusion. Depth of sedation was monitored using both the Ramsay sedation score (RSS) and the bispectral index (BIS). Cardiovascular, respiratory, biochemical and haematological data were obtained. Patients’ perceptions of their intensive care stay were assessed using the Hewitt questionnaire. Sedation was equivalent in the two groups [median (interquartile range): RSS, propofol group 5 (4–5), dexmedetomidine group 5 (4–6) (P=0.68); BIS, propofol group 53 (41–64), dexmedetomidine group 46 (36–58); P=0.32], but the propofol group received three times more alfentanil compared with patients sedated with dexmedetomidine [2.5 (2.2–2.9) mg h−1 versus 0.8 (0.65–1.2) mg h−1 (P=0.004)]. No differences were found in arterial pressures between the groups, but heart rate was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group [mean (sd) 75 (6) vs 90 (4) beats min−1]. Extubation times were similar and rapid with the use of both sedative agents [median (range) 28 (20–50) and 29 (15–50) min (P=0.63) respectively for the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups]. No adverse events related to the sedative infusions occurred in either group. Despite ventilation and intubation, patients sedated with dexmedetomidine could be easily roused to cooperate with procedures (e.g. physiotherapy, radiology) without showing irritation. From the clinician's and patient's perspectives, dexmedetomidine is a safe and acceptable sedative agent for those requiring intensive care. The rate pressure product is reduced in patients receiving dexmedetomidine, which may protect against myocardial ischaemia. Dexmedetomidine reduces the requirement for opioid analgesia.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-0912</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1471-6771</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/bja/87.5.684</identifier><identifier>PMID: 11878517</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BJANAD</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adrenergic alpha-Agonists ; Aged ; Alfentanil - administration & dosage ; anaesthetic techniques ; anaesthetic techniques, extubation ; analgesics ; analgesics, opioid ; Analgesics, Opioid - administration & dosage ; Biological and medical sciences ; cardiopulmonary ; complications ; Conscious Sedation - methods ; Critical Care - methods ; Dexmedetomidine ; Drug Administration Schedule ; extubation ; Hemodynamics - drug effects ; Hospital Mortality ; Humans ; Hypnotics and Sedatives ; Hypnotics. Sedatives ; intensive care ; Intensive Care Units ; intensive care, sedation, post-operative ; Intubation, Intratracheal ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; monitoring ; monitoring, cardiopulmonary ; Neuropharmacology ; opioid ; Patient Satisfaction ; Pharmacology. Drug treatments ; Postoperative Care - methods ; post‐operative ; Propofol ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychopharmacology ; Respiration, Artificial ; sedation ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; sympathetic nervous system ; sympathetic nervous system, dexmedetomidine</subject><ispartof>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 2001-11, Vol.87 (5), p.684-690</ispartof><rights>2001 British Journal of Anaesthesia</rights><rights>2001</rights><rights>2002 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright British Medical Association Nov 2001</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c565t-a9b46964e0f51572b0c97ee96cc73630f4202406bb6e8ea041c1128c85ac1a473</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c565t-a9b46964e0f51572b0c97ee96cc73630f4202406bb6e8ea041c1128c85ac1a473</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=14089876$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11878517$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Venn, R.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grounds, R.M.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in the intensive care unit: patient and clinician perceptions</title><title>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</title><addtitle>Br. J. Anaesth</addtitle><addtitle>Br. J. Anaesth</addtitle><description>The α2 agonist dexmedetomidine is a new sedative and analgesic agent which is licensed in the USA for post-operative intensive care sedation. We compared dexmedetomidine with propofol in patients requiring sedation in intensive care. Twenty adult patients expected to require a minimum of 8 h artificial ventilation after surgery were randomized to receive sedation with either dexmedetomidine or propofol infusions. Additional analgesia, if required, was provided by an alfentanil infusion. Depth of sedation was monitored using both the Ramsay sedation score (RSS) and the bispectral index (BIS). Cardiovascular, respiratory, biochemical and haematological data were obtained. Patients’ perceptions of their intensive care stay were assessed using the Hewitt questionnaire. Sedation was equivalent in the two groups [median (interquartile range): RSS, propofol group 5 (4–5), dexmedetomidine group 5 (4–6) (P=0.68); BIS, propofol group 53 (41–64), dexmedetomidine group 46 (36–58); P=0.32], but the propofol group received three times more alfentanil compared with patients sedated with dexmedetomidine [2.5 (2.2–2.9) mg h−1 versus 0.8 (0.65–1.2) mg h−1 (P=0.004)]. No differences were found in arterial pressures between the groups, but heart rate was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group [mean (sd) 75 (6) vs 90 (4) beats min−1]. Extubation times were similar and rapid with the use of both sedative agents [median (range) 28 (20–50) and 29 (15–50) min (P=0.63) respectively for the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups]. No adverse events related to the sedative infusions occurred in either group. Despite ventilation and intubation, patients sedated with dexmedetomidine could be easily roused to cooperate with procedures (e.g. physiotherapy, radiology) without showing irritation. From the clinician's and patient's perspectives, dexmedetomidine is a safe and acceptable sedative agent for those requiring intensive care. The rate pressure product is reduced in patients receiving dexmedetomidine, which may protect against myocardial ischaemia. Dexmedetomidine reduces the requirement for opioid analgesia.</description><subject>Adrenergic alpha-Agonists</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Alfentanil - administration & dosage</subject><subject>anaesthetic techniques</subject><subject>anaesthetic techniques, extubation</subject><subject>analgesics</subject><subject>analgesics, opioid</subject><subject>Analgesics, Opioid - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>cardiopulmonary</subject><subject>complications</subject><subject>Conscious Sedation - methods</subject><subject>Critical Care - methods</subject><subject>Dexmedetomidine</subject><subject>Drug Administration Schedule</subject><subject>extubation</subject><subject>Hemodynamics - drug effects</subject><subject>Hospital Mortality</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hypnotics and Sedatives</subject><subject>Hypnotics. Sedatives</subject><subject>intensive care</subject><subject>Intensive Care Units</subject><subject>intensive care, sedation, post-operative</subject><subject>Intubation, Intratracheal</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>monitoring</subject><subject>monitoring, cardiopulmonary</subject><subject>Neuropharmacology</subject><subject>opioid</subject><subject>Patient Satisfaction</subject><subject>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</subject><subject>Postoperative Care - methods</subject><subject>post‐operative</subject><subject>Propofol</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychopharmacology</subject><subject>Respiration, Artificial</subject><subject>sedation</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>sympathetic nervous system</subject><subject>sympathetic nervous system, dexmedetomidine</subject><issn>0007-0912</issn><issn>1471-6771</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0c9rFTEQB_BFFPus3jxLENSL-5rs5qc3eWirFL1UEC8hm53FPHeTbZKt1b_e1H1YEMHTXD4zk8y3qh4TvCVYtSfd3pxIsWVbLumdakOoIDUXgtytNhhjUWNFmqPqQUp7jIloFLtfHREihWREbKqfuzDNJroUPOogfwfwqIfrCXrIYXK984CM79EcwxyGMKIhRJSgN9mVDudR_gqlZPDJXQGyJgJavMuv0FwI-Py7247OO-uMRzNEC_NNc3pY3RvMmODRoR5Xn96-udid1ecfT9_tXp_XlnGWa6M6yhWngAdGmGg6bJUAUNxa0fIWD7TBDcW86zhIMJgSS0gjrWTGEkNFe1w9X-eWP1wukLKeXLIwjsZDWJIWpOFKYVng07_gPizRl7dpooQsSygr6OWKbAwpRRj0HN1k4g9NsL4JRJdAtBSa6RJI4U8OM5euHPUWHxIo4NkBmGTNOETjrUu3jmKppODFvVhdWOb_raxX6VKG6z_WxG-ai1Ywffb5i26alvEPp-_1RfF89VBCuHIQdbIlOQu9i2Cz7oP796JfGGfC2g</recordid><startdate>20011101</startdate><enddate>20011101</enddate><creator>Venn, R.M.</creator><creator>Grounds, R.M.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20011101</creationdate><title>Comparison between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in the intensive care unit: patient and clinician perceptions</title><author>Venn, R.M. ; Grounds, R.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c565t-a9b46964e0f51572b0c97ee96cc73630f4202406bb6e8ea041c1128c85ac1a473</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>Adrenergic alpha-Agonists</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Alfentanil - administration & dosage</topic><topic>anaesthetic techniques</topic><topic>anaesthetic techniques, extubation</topic><topic>analgesics</topic><topic>analgesics, opioid</topic><topic>Analgesics, Opioid - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>cardiopulmonary</topic><topic>complications</topic><topic>Conscious Sedation - methods</topic><topic>Critical Care - methods</topic><topic>Dexmedetomidine</topic><topic>Drug Administration Schedule</topic><topic>extubation</topic><topic>Hemodynamics - drug effects</topic><topic>Hospital Mortality</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hypnotics and Sedatives</topic><topic>Hypnotics. Sedatives</topic><topic>intensive care</topic><topic>Intensive Care Units</topic><topic>intensive care, sedation, post-operative</topic><topic>Intubation, Intratracheal</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>monitoring</topic><topic>monitoring, cardiopulmonary</topic><topic>Neuropharmacology</topic><topic>opioid</topic><topic>Patient Satisfaction</topic><topic>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</topic><topic>Postoperative Care - methods</topic><topic>post‐operative</topic><topic>Propofol</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychopharmacology</topic><topic>Respiration, Artificial</topic><topic>sedation</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>sympathetic nervous system</topic><topic>sympathetic nervous system, dexmedetomidine</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Venn, R.M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grounds, R.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Venn, R.M.</au><au>Grounds, R.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in the intensive care unit: patient and clinician perceptions</atitle><jtitle>British journal of anaesthesia : BJA</jtitle><stitle>Br. J. Anaesth</stitle><addtitle>Br. J. Anaesth</addtitle><date>2001-11-01</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>87</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>684</spage><epage>690</epage><pages>684-690</pages><issn>0007-0912</issn><eissn>1471-6771</eissn><coden>BJANAD</coden><abstract>The α2 agonist dexmedetomidine is a new sedative and analgesic agent which is licensed in the USA for post-operative intensive care sedation. We compared dexmedetomidine with propofol in patients requiring sedation in intensive care. Twenty adult patients expected to require a minimum of 8 h artificial ventilation after surgery were randomized to receive sedation with either dexmedetomidine or propofol infusions. Additional analgesia, if required, was provided by an alfentanil infusion. Depth of sedation was monitored using both the Ramsay sedation score (RSS) and the bispectral index (BIS). Cardiovascular, respiratory, biochemical and haematological data were obtained. Patients’ perceptions of their intensive care stay were assessed using the Hewitt questionnaire. Sedation was equivalent in the two groups [median (interquartile range): RSS, propofol group 5 (4–5), dexmedetomidine group 5 (4–6) (P=0.68); BIS, propofol group 53 (41–64), dexmedetomidine group 46 (36–58); P=0.32], but the propofol group received three times more alfentanil compared with patients sedated with dexmedetomidine [2.5 (2.2–2.9) mg h−1 versus 0.8 (0.65–1.2) mg h−1 (P=0.004)]. No differences were found in arterial pressures between the groups, but heart rate was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group [mean (sd) 75 (6) vs 90 (4) beats min−1]. Extubation times were similar and rapid with the use of both sedative agents [median (range) 28 (20–50) and 29 (15–50) min (P=0.63) respectively for the propofol and dexmedetomidine groups]. No adverse events related to the sedative infusions occurred in either group. Despite ventilation and intubation, patients sedated with dexmedetomidine could be easily roused to cooperate with procedures (e.g. physiotherapy, radiology) without showing irritation. From the clinician's and patient's perspectives, dexmedetomidine is a safe and acceptable sedative agent for those requiring intensive care. The rate pressure product is reduced in patients receiving dexmedetomidine, which may protect against myocardial ischaemia. Dexmedetomidine reduces the requirement for opioid analgesia.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>11878517</pmid><doi>10.1093/bja/87.5.684</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0007-0912 |
ispartof | British journal of anaesthesia : BJA, 2001-11, Vol.87 (5), p.684-690 |
issn | 0007-0912 1471-6771 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71269908 |
source | MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Adrenergic alpha-Agonists Aged Alfentanil - administration & dosage anaesthetic techniques anaesthetic techniques, extubation analgesics analgesics, opioid Analgesics, Opioid - administration & dosage Biological and medical sciences cardiopulmonary complications Conscious Sedation - methods Critical Care - methods Dexmedetomidine Drug Administration Schedule extubation Hemodynamics - drug effects Hospital Mortality Humans Hypnotics and Sedatives Hypnotics. Sedatives intensive care Intensive Care Units intensive care, sedation, post-operative Intubation, Intratracheal Medical sciences Middle Aged monitoring monitoring, cardiopulmonary Neuropharmacology opioid Patient Satisfaction Pharmacology. Drug treatments Postoperative Care - methods post‐operative Propofol Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychopharmacology Respiration, Artificial sedation Surveys and Questionnaires sympathetic nervous system sympathetic nervous system, dexmedetomidine |
title | Comparison between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in the intensive care unit: patient and clinician perceptions |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T18%3A11%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20between%20dexmedetomidine%20and%20propofol%20for%20sedation%20in%20the%20intensive%20care%20unit:%20patient%20and%20clinician%20perceptions&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20anaesthesia%20:%20BJA&rft.au=Venn,%20R.M.&rft.date=2001-11-01&rft.volume=87&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=684&rft.epage=690&rft.pages=684-690&rft.issn=0007-0912&rft.eissn=1471-6771&rft.coden=BJANAD&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/bja/87.5.684&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E92649378%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=197824045&rft_id=info:pmid/11878517&rft_oup_id=10.1093/bja/87.5.684&rft_els_id=S0007091217366096&rfr_iscdi=true |