These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Muscle relaxants in Germany 2005: a comparison of application customs in hospitals and private practices].
    Author: Fink H, Geldner G, Fuchs-Buder T, Hofmockel R, Ulm K, Wallek B, Blobner M.
    Journal: Anaesthesist; 2006 Jun; 55(6):668-78. PubMed ID: 16609885.
    Abstract:
    Aim of this study was to evaluate application customs of muscles relaxants in hospitals compared to their use in private practice. Of the 3,260 questionnaires sent-out, 66.9% could be analyzed. Of these 54% were from anesthetists in private practice, 41% from heads of hospital anesthesia departments and 5% from heads of level one hospital anesthesia departments. The first difference between private practices and hospitals was the number of available muscle relaxants: 87% of private practices use 1-3 relaxants, whereas 79% of hospitals use 3-5. Another apparent difference was the relationship between general anesthesia and the number of intubations: 60% of private practices have over 80% of general anesthesia cases, but only 50% of these patients are intubated. On the contrary, two thirds of the hospitals have 50-80% general anesthesia cases and 60-70% of patients are intubated. The main wish for an ideal muscle relaxant was independent of private practice or hospital, short onset time, followed by fast recovery. In accordance 74% of anesthetists in hospitals and 72% of anesthetists in private practice voiced the wish for a non-depolarizing succinylcholine substitute. The results of this nationwide survey suggest that time pressure in combination with an increased specialization of anesthetists in private practice are the main factors for availability and use of muscle relaxants in routine anesthesia.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]