Evaluation of effects of magnesium sulphate in reducing intraoperative anaesthetic requirements.

What Was Tested

The paper reports a study of Propofol, published as a randomized controlled trial.

The present randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study was designed to assess the effect of peroperatively administered i.v. magnesium sulphate on anaesthetic and analgesic requirements during total i.v. anaesthesia.

Who Took Part

According to the abstract, 36 women were involved.

PubMed tags the participants as both men and women.

Eighty-one patients (36 women, 45 men) undergoing elective spinal surgery were included in one of two parallel groups.

How the Study Was Run

The design is described as randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled and parallel-group.

Random assignment meant chance, not the researchers, decided who got Propofol and who got the comparison, which limits bias.

As a double-blind Propofol study, the assignments were hidden from both participants and investigators until the end.

A placebo (an inactive look-alike) gave the Propofol group a baseline to be compared against.

The Propofol group and the comparison group ran side by side rather than switching.

The same volume of isotonic solution was administered to the control group.

Anaesthesia was maintained with propofol (administered according to the bispectral index) and remifentanil (adjusted according to heart rate and arterial blood pressure) infusions.

What Was Measured

Topics PubMed links to this paper include Anesthesia, Intravenous, Anesthetics, Combined, Anesthetics, Intravenous, Diskectomy, Drug Synergism, Electroencephalography and Hemodynamics.

What This Means in Plain Language

The paper is a randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled study of Propofol in 36 women.

With fewer than 40 people, it is a small study, so it is better read as an early signal for further research than as a settled answer.

The abstract goes on to report its results in about 5 sentences; this page does not restate them, so read the paper for the findings and their limits.

The publication is from 2002 (British journal of anaesthesia), a journal based in England.

More context: all human trials.