ReviewVeterinary evidence
Appearance of post-induction respiratory apnoea in dogs following slow or fast administration of propofol.
Review in Veterinary evidence. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PICO question: In healthy dogs undergoing general anaesthesia is rapid infusion of propofol compared to slow infusion of propofol associated with a greater incidence or duration of post-induction apnoea? Clinical bottom line: Category of research: Treatment. Number and type of study designs reviewed: Four prospective, randomised, controlled clinical trials. Strength of evidence: Weak. Outcomes reported: The studies have produced inconsistent findings regarding the relationship between propofol infusion speed and post-induction apnoea appearance in dogs. While two studies have found that increasing the speed of administration increases the incidence or duration of post-induction apnoea, other studies have not found a significant correlation. Conclusion: Based on available evidence, administering propofol at a slow rate is unlikely to lower the incidence or duration of post-induction apnoea compared with faster propofol infusion where the total dose is kept constant. However, administering propofol slowly is recommended when titrating to effect, since slow administration reduces the total dose required to induce anaesthesia, thereby reducing the risk of apnoea.
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.