Relative potency of propofol and thiopentone

tive lack of pcrceived anxiety persisted in the triazolam group throughout the study period, whereas lorazepam resulted in a significant reduction in the initially higher level of perceived anxiety to reach values comparable to those in patients who had received triazolam. Values for anxiety in both drug treatment groups were consistcntly lower than for those who received placebo. The triazolam group were also subjectively less alert or clear-headed after 60 minutes and at induction than the placebo group and this may have affected the patients' ability to assess their own anxiety. It is a virtually inescapable concomitant of anxiolylic therapy that sedation results! The data for the patient's assessment of sleepiness in thc anacsthctic room are also available, and show no significant difference betwccn treatment groups, although those who received triazolam were significantly more sleepy at 60 minutes than those given placebo. By 6 hours after the operation, the patient's assessments of anxiety, alertness and clear-headedness were comparable between triazolam and placebo, whereas a significant reduction in alertness persisted in those given lorazepam, which is in agreement with the results of the physician's assessments. We suspect that the philosophical point whether preincdication is given to satisfy the patient or the anaesthetist, will be debated as long as patients continue to present for anacsthcsia. For somc anaesthetists, sedation of the patient enhances the ability to produce a smooth induction which docs not disrupt the anacsthetist, surgeon or other theatre staff. The growing acceptance of the practice of omitting sedative premcdication for day cases may erode this view but. if the patients need anxiolysis and the anaesthetist requires sedated patients who recover swiftly, triazolam may fulfill those objectives with the slight penalty of increased dizziness a t the time of induction.