Induction techniques that reduce redistribution hypothermia: a prospective, randomized, controlled, single blind effectiveness study

Table 2 Differences between the mean core temperature (°C) of each of three alternative induction groups and the standard propofol alone group at each time point^*

Comparison groups	T₁₅	T₃₀	T₄₅	T₆₀
INH/100 minus PROP
Difference (°C)	0.46	0.46	0.47	0.49
95% CI of difference	0.28 to 0.64	0.28 to 0.64	0.25 to 0.69	0.20 to 0.77
INH/50 minus PROP
Difference (°C)	0.47^**	0.52^**	0.50	0.54
95% CI of difference	0.31 to 0.64	0.36 to 0.69	0.31 to 0.69	0.28 to 0.79
Phnl/PROP minus PROP
Difference (°C)	0.39	0.41	0.45	0.47^**
95% CI of difference	0.24 to 0.54	0.25 to 0.57	0.27 to 0.63	0.25 to 0.70

^*Applying Bonferroni’s correction for the 12 multiple comparisons (3 groups compared to propofol only group at 4 time points) results in α = 0.05/12 = 0.0042. All 12 comparisons achieved statistical significance as p ≤ 0.001 < α = 0.0042 for each of the above comparisons
^**These differences are correct to 2 decimal places. Because of rounding to two decimal places in Fig. 2, they differ by 0.01 from those that would be calculated using Fig. 2

ISSN: 1471-2253