LAUSR

United States of America 2008; 105: 1309–14. 2. Pandit JJ. Monitoring (un)consciousness: the implications of a new definition of ‘anaesthesia’. Anaesthesia 2014; 69: 801–7. 3. Sep ulveda V PO, Carrasco E, Tapia LF, et al. Evidence of hysteresis in propofol pharmacodynamics. Anaesthesia 2018; 73: 40–48. 4. Jeleazcov C, Lavielle M, Sch€ uttler J, Ihmsen H. Pharmacodynamic response modelling of arterial blood pressure in adult volunteers during propofol anaesthesia. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2015; 115: 213–26. 5. Doufas AG, Bakhshandeh M, Bjorksten AR, Shafer SL, Sessler DI. Induction speed is not a determinant of propofol pharmacodynamics. Anesthesiology 2004; 101: 1112–21. 6. Iwakiri H, Nishihara N, Nagata O, Matsukawa T, Ozaki M, Sessler DI. Individual effect-site concentrations of propofol are similar at loss of consciousness and at awakening. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2005; 100: 107–10. 7. Glen JB, Servin F. Evaluation of the predictive performance of four pharmacokinetic models for propofol. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2009; 102: 626–32. 8. Sep ulveda V PO, Mora X. Reevaluation of the time course of the effect of propofol described with the Schnider pharmacokinetic model. Revista Espa~ nola de Anestesiolog ıa y Reanimaci on 2012; 59: 542–8. 9. Coetzee JF, Glen JB, Wium CA, Boshoff L. Pharmacokinetic model selection for target controlled infusions of propofol: assessment of three parameter sets. Anesthesiology 1995; 82: 1328–45. 10. Cort ınez LI. What is the ke0 and what does it tell me about propofol? Anaesthesia 2014; 69: 399–402. 11. Glen JB, Engbers FH. The influence of target concentration, equilibration rate constant (ke0) and pharmacokinetic model on the initial propofol dose delivered in effect-site target-controlled infusion. Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 306–14. 12. Thomson AJ, Morrison G, Thomson E, Beattie C, Nimmo AF, Glen JB. Induction of general anaesthesia by effectsite target-controlled infusion of propofol: influence of pharmacokinetic model and ke0 value. Anaesthesia 2014; 69: 429–35. 13. Thomson AJ, Nimmo AF, Engbers FH, Glen JB. A novel technique to determine an ‘apparent ke0 ‘value for use with the Marsh pharmacokinetic model for propofol. Anaesthesia 2014; 69: 420–8. 14. Barakat AR, Sutcliffe N, Schwab M. Effect site concentration during propofol TCI sedation: a comparison of sedation score with two pharmacokinetic models. Anaesthesia 2007; 62: 661–6. 15. Absalom AR, Mani V, De Smet T, Struys MM. Pharmacokinetic models for propofol – defining and illuminating the devil in the detail. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2009; 103: 26–37. 16. Engbers FH, Sutcliffe N, Kenny G, Schraag S. Pharmacokinetic models for propofol: defining and illuminating the devil in the detail. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2010; 104: 261–2. 17. Glen JB, White M. A comparison of the predictive performance of three pharmacokinetic models for propofol using measured values obtained during target-controlled infusion. Anaesthesia 2014; 69: 550–7. 18. Corazzol M, Lio G, Lefevre A, et al. Restoring consciousness with vagus nerve stimulation. Current Biology 2017; 2017: R994–6. 19. Jung YS, Paik H, Min SH, et al. Calling the patient’s own name facilitates recovery from general anaesthesia: a randomised double-blind trial. Anaesthesia 2017; 72: 197–203.