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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:British journal of anaesthesia : BJA 2001-11, Vol.87 (5), p.684-690
Hauptverfasser: Venn, R.M., Grounds, R.M.
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 &amp; dosage ; anaesthetic techniques ; anaesthetic techniques, extubation ; analgesics ; analgesics, opioid ; Analgesics, Opioid - administration &amp; 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&amp;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 &amp; dosage</subject><subject>anaesthetic techniques</subject><subject>anaesthetic techniques, extubation</subject><subject>analgesics</subject><subject>analgesics, opioid</subject><subject>Analgesics, Opioid - administration &amp; 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 &amp; dosage</topic><topic>anaesthetic techniques</topic><topic>anaesthetic techniques, extubation</topic><topic>analgesics</topic><topic>analgesics, opioid</topic><topic>Analgesics, Opioid - administration &amp; 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 &amp; 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