Methods | RCT | |
Participants | Country: India N = 40 (enrolled) (20 isoflurane, 20 propofol) Operation: elective off‐pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) Exclusion: Patients with poor ventricular function of lesser than 40%; left ventricular aneurysms; and renal/hepatic dysfunction, requiring extra corporeal circulation; preoperative or intraoperative intraaortic balloon pump, presence of unstable angina, carotid stenosis, cerebrovascular accident; excessive alcohol intake and drug abuse Isoflurane Gender: male/female 9/1, 8/2 Age: 50±6, 50±4 years Weight: 71±5, 71±6 kg Propofol Gender: male/female 8/2, 10/0 Age: 52±7, 47±5 years Weight: 71±6, 71±4 kg |
|
Interventions |
|
|
Outcomes | ‐Amount of isoflurane (ml) or propofol (ml) ‐Time to extubation ‐Intraoperative recall awareness |
|
Notes | ||
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Insufficient information regarding the sequence generation process |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | "Patients were randomly divided into four groups by a sealed envelope technique.." |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Insufficient information regarding withdrawal/dropouts |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All expected outcomes reported |
Other bias | Unclear risk | The unblinded anaesthesiologists could potentially lead to ' learning contamination bias" during administration of the anaesthetics |
Blinding of patients? | Low risk | All patients were anaesthetized |
Blinding of anaesthesiologists? | High risk | It is unlikely to blind the anaesthesia providers who delivery the anaesthetics |
Blinding of outcome assessors? | Unclear risk | insufficient information. The study has not stated clearly whether the intensive care unit research fellow, who was an interviewer, blinded to the group assignment or not |