Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  • Users Online: 400
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
ARTICLE
Year : 2001  |  Volume : 8  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 81-85

A comparative study of induction and recovery characteristics of propofol and midazolam


Department of Anaesthesia, University of Benin Teaching Hospital, Benin City, Edo State, Nigeria

Correspondence Address:
N P Edomwonyi
Department of Anaesthesia, University of Benin Teaching Hospital, Benin City, Edo State
Nigeria
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

Propofol and midazolam were compared in 40 adult patients in A.S.A. 1 or 2 presenting for short surgical procedures (< 70 minutes) with respect to induction time, pain on injection, apnoea, heart rates, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, time to eye opening on command. The first group was induced with midazolam (0.15-0.20 mg/kg) while the second was induced with propofol (2-2.5 mg/kg) intravenously. In all other respects except for the surgery that patients had the same treatment. The mean induction time was 55.25 + 26.66 and 69.75 + 24.72 for propofol and midazolam groups respectively. In the midazolam group apnoea occurred in 10% of patients compared to 80% of patients in the propofol group. Local reaction (phlebitis) was absent in the midazolam compared with 20% incident rate observed in the midazolam group. Propofol lowered blood pressure more than midazolam after three minutes of induction at a statistically significant level (P < 0.05). Recovery was significantly more rapid following propofol (P < 0.05).


[PDF Not available]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed292    
    Printed7    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded0    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal