{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.028178694158075602, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008247422680412371, 'mean_word_length': 5.618181818181818, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Recovery following propofol ('Diprivan') anaesthesia--a review of three different anaesthetic techniques.

The effect of propofol, in the emulsion formulation, on post-anaesthetic recovery was studied in 80 patients anaesthetized using one of three different techniques. Propofol was administered to 20 day case patients for induction of anaesthesia, to 20 patients for induction and maintenance by intermittent bolus injection to supplement spinal blockade, and to 40 patients for induction and maintenance by continuous infusion with spontaneous ventilation. Its effects were compared with those of methohexitone (all three techniques) and thiopentone (day case study only). The assessment of post-operative recovery included measurement of the speed of immediate recovery, psychometric testing comprising choice reaction time and critical flicker fusion threshold and the incidence of post-operative sequelae. In all three techniques, propofol was associated with rapid and symptom-free recovery from anaesthesia. With the day case and infusion techniques immediate recovery was more rapid after propofol than after methohexitone and thiopentone. Recovery of psychomotor function was more rapid after propofol in the day case study. The frequency of sequelae such as nausea and vomiting (5% of cases), headache (1%) and confusion/restlessness (2.5%) was considerably lower overall after propofol and in each individual study than with the other agents.