A comparison of soda lime (Intersurgical) with Amsorb® plus: the cost implications

This was a prospective study comparing the cost implications between two carbon dioxide (CO2) absorbers, soda lime (Intersurgical) and AMSORB® PLUS. The study was conducted over two 4-week periods in two dedicated operating theatres using Datex Ohmeda Aestiva/5 anaesthetic machines. AMSORB® PLUS was...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors:	Helmi AH, Esa Kamaruzaman, Khairulamir Zainuddin, Azarinah Izaham, Nurlia Yahya, Nadia Md Nor
Format:	Article
Language:	English
Published:	Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre 2016
Online Access:	http://journalarticle.ukm.my/10236/ http://journalarticle.ukm.my/10236/ http://journalarticle.ukm.my/10236/1/3._helmi_et_al..pdf

id	ukm-10236
recordtype	eprints
spelling	ukm-102362017-03-29T08:47:17Z http://journalarticle.ukm.my/10236/ A comparison of soda lime (Intersurgical) with Amsorb® plus: the cost implications Helmi AH, Esa Kamaruzaman, Khairulamir Zainuddin, Azarinah Izaham, Nurlia Yahya, Nadia Md Nor, This was a prospective study comparing the cost implications between two carbon dioxide (CO2) absorbers, soda lime (Intersurgical) and AMSORB® PLUS. The study was conducted over two 4-week periods in two dedicated operating theatres using Datex Ohmeda Aestiva/5 anaesthetic machines. AMSORB® PLUS was used during the first four weeks and soda lime (Intersurgical) the following four weeks. General anaesthesia was administered as routinely done but fresh gas flow (FGF) during the maintenance phase was limited to a maximum flow of 2 L/min. The CO2 absorber was only changed when there was evidence of exhaustion. Total duration of anaesthesia, sevoflurane (bottles) and CO2 absorber (kg) consumption, and amount of waste product (kg) was calculated at the end of each study period. The total cost of delivering general anaesthesia was lower in the AMSORB® PLUS group, RM82.40 (USD19.89)/hour versus the soda lime group, RM91.50 (USD 22.09)/hour (p=0.17), which translates to a 10% reduction in cost per hour. Reduction in sevoflurane consumption in the AMSORB® PLUS compared to the soda lime group was also not statistically significant (p=0.22). The only significant finding was the reduction in CO2 absorber consumption in the AMSORB® PLUS group as compared to soda lime group (p=0.001). In conclusion, AMSORB® PLUS consumption was significantly reduced compared to that of soda lime. However, the use of AMSORB® PLUS did not significantly reduce sevoflurane consumption nor the total cost of delivering general anaesthesia. Given the superior safety profile, AMSORB® PLUS may be a suitable, cost-effective alternative to soda lime in the daily practice of anaesthesia. Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre 2016 Article PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://journalarticle.ukm.my/10236/1/3._helmi_et_al..pdf Helmi AH, and Esa Kamaruzaman, and Khairulamir Zainuddin, and Azarinah Izaham, and Nurlia Yahya, and Nadia Md Nor, (2016) A comparison of soda lime (Intersurgical) with Amsorb® plus: the cost implications. Journal of Surgical Academia, 6 (2). pp. 12-17. ISSN 2231-7481 http://jsurgacad.com/toc
repository_type	Digital Repository
institution_category	Local University
institution	Universiti Kebangasaan Malaysia
building	UKM Institutional Repository
collection	Online Access
language	English
description	This was a prospective study comparing the cost implications between two carbon dioxide (CO2) absorbers, soda lime (Intersurgical) and AMSORB® PLUS. The study was conducted over two 4-week periods in two dedicated operating theatres using Datex Ohmeda Aestiva/5 anaesthetic machines. AMSORB® PLUS was used during the first four weeks and soda lime (Intersurgical) the following four weeks. General anaesthesia was administered as routinely done but fresh gas flow (FGF) during the maintenance phase was limited to a maximum flow of 2 L/min. The CO2 absorber was only changed when there was evidence of exhaustion. Total duration of anaesthesia, sevoflurane (bottles) and CO2 absorber (kg) consumption, and amount of waste product (kg) was calculated at the end of each study period. The total cost of delivering general anaesthesia was lower in the AMSORB® PLUS group, RM82.40 (USD19.89)/hour versus the soda lime group, RM91.50 (USD 22.09)/hour (p=0.17), which translates to a 10% reduction in cost per hour. Reduction in sevoflurane consumption in the AMSORB® PLUS compared to the soda lime group was also not statistically significant (p=0.22). The only significant finding was the reduction in CO2 absorber consumption in the AMSORB® PLUS group as compared to soda lime group (p=0.001). In conclusion, AMSORB® PLUS consumption was significantly reduced compared to that of soda lime. However, the use of AMSORB® PLUS did not significantly reduce sevoflurane consumption nor the total cost of delivering general anaesthesia. Given the superior safety profile, AMSORB® PLUS may be a suitable, cost-effective alternative to soda lime in the daily practice of anaesthesia.
format	Article
author	Helmi AH, Esa Kamaruzaman, Khairulamir Zainuddin, Azarinah Izaham, Nurlia Yahya, Nadia Md Nor,
spellingShingle	Helmi AH, Esa Kamaruzaman, Khairulamir Zainuddin, Azarinah Izaham, Nurlia Yahya, Nadia Md Nor, A comparison of soda lime (Intersurgical) with Amsorb® plus: the cost implications
author_facet	Helmi AH, Esa Kamaruzaman, Khairulamir Zainuddin, Azarinah Izaham, Nurlia Yahya, Nadia Md Nor,
author_sort	Helmi AH,
title	A comparison of soda lime (Intersurgical) with Amsorb® plus: the cost implications
title_short	A comparison of soda lime (Intersurgical) with Amsorb® plus: the cost implications
title_full	A comparison of soda lime (Intersurgical) with Amsorb® plus: the cost implications
title_fullStr	A comparison of soda lime (Intersurgical) with Amsorb® plus: the cost implications
title_full_unstemmed	A comparison of soda lime (Intersurgical) with Amsorb® plus: the cost implications
title_sort	comparison of soda lime (intersurgical) with amsorb® plus: the cost implications
publisher	Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre
publishDate	2016
url	http://journalarticle.ukm.my/10236/ http://journalarticle.ukm.my/10236/ http://journalarticle.ukm.my/10236/1/3._helmi_et_al..pdf
first_indexed	2023-09-18T19:56:51Z
last_indexed	2023-09-18T19:56:51Z
_version_	1777406586934788096

A comparison of soda lime (Intersurgical) with Amsorb® plus: the cost implications

Similar Items