Survey on small animal anaesthesia |
| |
| Authors: | A NICHOLSON ADJ WATSON |
| |
| Institution: | Department of Anaesthetics, St Vincent's Public Hospital, Darlinghurst, New South Wales. |
| |
| Abstract: | OBJECTIVE: To ascertain anaesthetic practices currently for dogs and cats in Australia. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to 4,800 veterinarians throughout Australia, seeking data on numbers of dogs and cats anaesthetised per week; drug preferences for anaesthetic premedication, induction and maintenance; use of tracheal intubation, supplemental nitrous oxide and anaesthetic antagonists; and types of vaporisers, breathing systems and anaesthetic monitoring devices used or available. Additional questions concerned proportions of different animal types seen in the practice, and the respondent's university and year of graduation. RESULTS: The response rate was 19%; 95% of respondents graduated from Australian universities, about half since 1985. Most responses (79%) came from mainly small animal practices. On average 16 dogs and 12 cats were anaesthetised each week. Premedication was used more often in dogs than cats, with acepromazine and atropine most favoured in both species. For anaesthetic induction, thiopentone was most preferred in dogs and alphaxalone/alphadolone in cats. Inhaled agents, especially halothane, were preferred for maintenance in both species. Most respondents usually employed tracheal intubation when using inhalational anaesthetic maintenance, but intubation rates were lower during injectable anaesthetic maintenance and a minority of respondents provided supplemental O2. Nitrous oxide was administered regularly by 13% of respondents. The agents most frequently used to speed recovery from anaesthesia were doxapram and yohimbine. The most widely used vaporisers were the Fluotec Mark III and the Stephens machine. Most (95%) respondents used a rebreathing circuit for large dogs and a non-rebreathing system was used for small dogs by 68% of respondents. Most respondents (93%) indicated some form of aid was available to monitor general anaesthesia: the three most mentioned were an apnoea alarm, oesophageal stethoscope and electrocardiogram. CONCLUSION: Diverse approaches were evident, but there appeared to be less variation in anaesthetising dogs: premedication was more frequent and less varied in type, while thiobarbituates dominated for induction and inhalants for maintenance. Injectable maintenance techniques had substantial use in cats, but little in dogs. Evident disparity between vaporisers available and circuits used suggested either confusion in terminology or incorrect use of some vaporisers in-circuit. While most respondents used monitoring equipment or a dedicated observer to invigilate anaesthesia, the common reliance on apnoea alarms is of concern, because of unproven reliability and accuracy. |
| |
| Keywords: | Anaesthesia techniques drugs dogs cats monitoring |
|
|
