Pharmacoeconomic issues related to the selection of neuromuscular blocking
agents are described.
Five models of economic analysis are commonly used in health care: cost-min
imization, rest-benefit, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-of-illn
ess. The model used most commonly in anesthesiology is the cost-effectivene
ss model, in which outcomes are measured in nonmonetary terms that are then
translated into units of successor failure. The true cost of anesthetic dr
ugs and techniques should include more than acquisition cost. Factors typic
ally included in economic analyses include resources used and humanistic: f
actors. Six specific indirect costs should be included in: pharmacoeconomic
analyses of neuromuscular blocking agents:cost of residual muscle blockade
, cost of prolonged time to extubation, inability of patients to resume nor
mal activities because of postoperative myalgia, cost of additional postope
rative monitoring for arrhythmia associated with reversal drugs, and risk o
f nausea and vomiting associated with reversal drugs. The. availability of
rapid-onset, shorter-duration anesthetics; analgesics, and:neuromuscular bl
ocking agents with fewer adverse effects and the availability of less invas
ive surgical techniques have made it possible to accelerate the movement of
patients in and out-of the operating room and have shortened lengths of st
ay in the postanesthesia care unit(PACU) and the intensive rare unit (ICU).
Decreased length df stay in. the PACU and the ICU can save hundreds of dol
lars per case because these areas have high personnel costs. If reversal dr
ugs like neostigmine can be avoided, fewer patients may experience postoper
ative nausea and vomiting and the resulting complications.
In searching for the best outcome at the most reasonable cost, practitioner
s should look for meaningful cost reductions, bearing in mind that the use
of newer, shorter-acting drugs has led to improved perioperative efficiency
in clinical practice.