ReviewHealth science reports2025
Recovery Profiles and Well-Being Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Various Anaesthesia Techniques: A Systematic Review.
Review in Health science reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aim: An appropriate anaesthesia technique is considered for the patient's health status to ensure a painless recovery. This study explored the important role of anesthesia selection in improving recovery outcomes and patient well-being across diverse surgical settings. Methods: This study employed a systematic literature review methodology. Different databases, including Scopus, Google Scholar, and PubMed, were used to search for potential studies. A total of 20 studies were selected for qualitative analysis. Results: We found that general anesthesia is widely favored. However, certain procedures stressed the efficacy of spinal and regional approaches in managing pain and promoting faster recovery. Intravenous anesthetics such as propofol and newer agents like remimazolam and ciprofol are associated with improved recovery rates in high-risk patients, providing hemodynamic stability and reducing the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Furthermore, Opioid-sparing and xenon-based anesthetics also contributed to better recovery profiles. Conclusion: Anesthesia choice plays a critical role in patient recovery, with tailored techniques enhancing outcomes and reducing adverse effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.