Age

Fig.1 Plot of Age distribution across Groups

The Dodged bar chart above represents individual counts representing frequency of age_grp categories 30-40,50-60,40-50,20-30,10-20 and 60-70 in categories FENTOFOL and KETOFOL Subgroups. Age Group group 30-40 has highest percentage 16/40 ( 40 % ) in group FENTOFOL . Subgroup 40-50 has highest percentage 15/40 ( 37.5 % ) in group KETOFOL . To formally check for association between groups we performed pearson chi-square test .

we found a Non-significant association between age_grp and DRUG. The chi-square statistic was 5.44 . The degree of freedom was 5 and P value was 0.36 .Contingency and Proportion table are shown below.

Table 2

DRUG	age_grp	n	value	95 % Confidence Interval
FENTOFOL	10-20	1	1/40 ( 2.5 %)	0.27% - 11.09%
FENTOFOL	20-30	5	5/40 ( 12.5 %)	4.93% - 25.25%
FENTOFOL	30-40	16	16/40 ( 40 %)	25.95% - 55.44%
FENTOFOL	40-50	13	13/40 ( 32.5 %)	19.6% - 47.84%
FENTOFOL	50-60	4	4/40 ( 10 %)	3.47% - 22.04%
FENTOFOL	60-70	1	1/40 ( 2.5 %)	0.27% - 11.09%
KETOFOL	10-20	3	3/40 ( 7.5 %)	2.16% - 18.68%
KETOFOL	20-30	5	5/40 ( 12.5 %)	4.93% - 25.25%
KETOFOL	30-40	9	9/40 ( 22.5 %)	11.76% - 37.06%
KETOFOL	40-50	15	15/40 ( 37.5 %)	23.79% - 52.95%
KETOFOL	50-60	8	8/40 ( 20 %)	9.94% - 34.22%

Table 3

	FENTOFOL	KETOFOL
10-20	1	3
20-30	5	5
30-40	16	9
40-50	13	15
50-60	4	8
60-70	1	0

Gender

Figure 2 Sex Distribution in Our Population

The Dodged bar chart above represents individual counts representing frequency of SEX categories Female and Male in categories FENTOFOL and KETOFOL . To formally check for association between groups we performed pearson chi-square test

we found a Non-significant association between SEX and CO-INDUCTION Agent. The chi-square statistic was 0.05 . The degree of freedom was 1 and P value was 0.82 .Contingency and Proportion table are shown below

Table 4

DRUG	SEX	n	value	95 % Confidence Interval
FENTOFOL	Female	21	21/40 ( 52.5 %)	37.3% - 67.35%
FENTOFOL	Male	19	19/40 ( 47.5 %)	32.65% - 62.7%
KETOFOL	Female	23	23/40 ( 57.5 %)	42.1% - 71.85%
KETOFOL	Male	17	17/40 ( 42.5 %)	28.15% - 57.9%

Table 5

	FENTOFOL	KETOFOL
Female	21	23
Male	19	17

Effect On systolic Blood Pressure

Figure 3 Trace-Plot Of variation in Systolic BP with Time in FentoFol and Ketofol groups

This is a trace-plot of variation in Systolic BP (on Y axis) with passage of of time of LMA insertion on X-axis , Systolic BP readings of FentoFol and Ketofol Groups across various stages are connected by distinct colored trace-line . Individual readings have been plotted on graph and points have been jittered for better clarity . The raw data points representing two groups have different shapes as indicated in the legend. The colored points across the trace represent the mean readings in two groups and whiskers represent Standard error of measurements.

we can clearly see a negative trend/slope indicating a fall with passage of Time. The difference between two Drug Group appears significant,However the Fall in Systolic BP with Time is moderated by effect of Drugs as we can see different slopes of variation with Time between Fentofol and KetoFol groups indicating average difference in Systolic BP across groups varies with Time. . we decided to explore this intuitive graphical relationship with formal statistical tests.

.Two way repeated measures ANOVA was done to assess difference between average Systolic BP across Stages/time of LMA Insertion group and if there was inter-group differences between 2 Drugs . An interaction test was also conducted to see if inter-group variation of value within t Stages/time of LMA Insertion was affected by Drug. Inter group comparison of average difference between SBP of 2 Drugs was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(1, 78) = 50.08,p= 0.0001. Intra group comparison of average difference between value of SBP across Stages/time of LMA Insertion was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(6, 468) = 130.38,p= 0.0001. Interaction of SBP within Stages/time of LMA Insertion with Drug was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(6, 468) = 133.66,p= 0.0001

Since Inter group average differences of Systolic BP between 2 DRUG Groups was significant. We performed a test of contrasts. The Inter-group difference between FENTOFOL - KETOFOL was significant with mean difference of -12.61+-1.78, pvalue= <0.001. Table of means/standard errors and contrasts is presented below.

Table 6. Average Systolic BP, standard error and 95% Confidence limits in DRUG Groups

Drug	Mean	Standard_Error	lower.CL	upper.CL
FENTOFOL	112.418	1.26	109.910	114.926
KETOFOL	125.025	1.26	122.517	127.533

Table 7. Average Contrast in Systolic BP within DRUG Groups

contrast	estimate	SE	df	t.ratio	p.value
FENTOFOL - KETOFOL	-12.607	1.781	78	-7.077	0

We also wanted to look for a trend in our Stages/time of LMA Insertion group since it had a time varying component .We found a significant Negative linear trend in intra-group difference with Stages/time of LMA Insertion, (-67.29+-2.96) , p value= <0.001. It was qualified by a significant quadratic,cubic and degree 5 and 6 trends indicating a non-linear variation in systolic BP with Stages/time of LMA Insertion (p value= <0.001). The non-linear trend is apparent in plot as well where we see that maximum fall occurs post Propofol in Both groups,Followed by a rise. In KetoFol group Systolic BP remains relatively steady. Table of means/standard errors and contrasts is presented below.

Table 8. Average Systolic BP, standard error and 95% Confidence limits in various Satges Of LMA Insertion

time	Mean	Standard_Error	lower.CL	upper.CL
Before.Induction	127.138	1.03	125.101	129.174
After.Intervention	127.800	1.03	125.763	129.837
After.propofol	115.588	1.03	113.551	117.624
After.LMA	119.100	1.03	117.063	121.137
1.min	111.638	1.03	109.601	113.674
2.min	115.688	1.03	113.651	117.724
3.min	114.100	1.03	112.063	116.137

Table 9. Average Contrast in Systolic BP within all Subgroups of Stages of LMA Insertion

contrast	estimate	SE	df	t.ratio	p.value
Before.Induction - After.Intervention	-0.662	0.79	468	-0.839	0.981
Before.Induction - After.propofol	11.550	0.79	468	14.625	0.001
Before.Induction - After.LMA	8.038	0.79	468	10.177	0.001
Before.Induction - 1.min	15.500	0.79	468	19.626	0.001
Before.Induction - 2.min	11.450	0.79	468	14.498	0.001
Before.Induction - 3.min	13.038	0.79	468	16.508	0.001
After.Intervention - After.propofol	12.213	0.79	468	15.463	0.001
After.Intervention - After.LMA	8.700	0.79	468	11.016	0.001
After.Intervention - 1.min	16.163	0.79	468	20.465	0.001
After.Intervention - 2.min	12.112	0.79	468	15.337	0.001
After.Intervention - 3.min	13.700	0.79	468	17.347	0.001
After.propofol - After.LMA	-3.513	0.79	468	-4.448	0.001
After.propofol - 1.min	3.950	0.79	468	5.001	0.001
After.propofol - 2.min	-0.100	0.79	468	-0.127	1
After.propofol - 3.min	1.487	0.79	468	1.883	0.492
After.LMA - 1.min	7.463	0.79	468	9.449	0.001
After.LMA - 2.min	3.413	0.79	468	4.321	0.001
After.LMA - 3.min	5.000	0.79	468	6.331	0.001
1.min - 2.min	-4.050	0.79	468	-5.128	0.001
1.min - 3.min	-2.463	0.79	468	-3.118	0.032
2.min - 3.min	1.587	0.79	468	2.010	0.41

Effect On Diastolic Blood Pressure

Figure 4 Trace-Plot Of variation in Diastolic BP with Time in FentoFol and Ketofol groups

This is a trace-plot of variation in Diastolic BP (on Y axis) with passage of of time of LMA insertion on X-axis , Diastolic BP readings of FentoFol and Ketofol Groups across various stages are connected by distinct colored trace-line . Individual readings have been plotted on graph and points have been jittered for better clarity . The raw data points representing two groups have different shapes as indicated in the legend. The colored points across the trace represent the mean readings in two groups and whiskers represent Standard error of measurements.

we can clearly see a negative trend/slope indicating a fall with passage of Time. The difference between two Drug Group appears significant,However the Fall in Diastolic BP with Time is moderated by effect of Drugs as we can see different slopes of variation with Time between Fentofol and KetoFol groups indicating average difference in Diastolic BP across groups varies with Time. . we decided to explore this intuitive graphical relationship with formal statistical tests.

Two way repeated measures ANOVA was done to assess difference between average value of DBP across Stages/time of LMA Insertion and if there was inter-group differences between 2 Drugs . An interaction test was also conducted to see if inter-group variation of DBP within Stages/time of LMA Insertion time was affected by Drug. Inter group comparison of average difference of DBP between 2 Drugs was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(1, 78) = 27.91,p= 0.0001. Intra group comparison of average difference between DBP across Stages/time of LMA Insertion was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(6, 468) = 117.71,p= 0.0001. Interaction of DBP within Stages/time of LMA Insertion with Drug was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(6, 468) = 32.47,p= 0.0001

Since Intra group average differences of value between 2 DRUGS was significant. We performed a test of contrasts. The Inter-group difference between FENTOFOL - KETOFOL was significant with mean difference of -5.6+-1.06, pvalue= <0.001

Table 10. Average Diastolic BP, standard error and 95% Confidence limits in DRUG Groups

Drug	Mean	Standard_Error	lower.CL	upper.CL
FENTOFOL	62.029	0.749	60.537	63.520
KETOFOL	67.625	0.749	66.134	69.116

Table 11. Average Contrast in Diastolic BP within DRUG Groups

contrast	estimate	SE	df	t.ratio	p.value
FENTOFOL - KETOFOL	-5.596	1.059	78	-5.283	0

We also wanted to look for a trend in our time group since it had a time varying component .We found a significant Negative linear trend in intra-group difference with Stages/time of LMA Insertion , (-24.72+-1.6, p value= <0.001). It was qualified by a significant quadratic,cubic and degree 5 and 6 trends indicating a non-linear variation in Diastolic BP with Time (p value= <0.001). The non-linear trend is apparent in plot as well where we see that maximum fall occurs post Propofol in Both groups( though lesser as compared to Systolic BP) ,Followed by a rise. In KetoFol group Diastolic BP remains relatively steady. Table of means/standard errors and contrasts is presented below.

Table 12. Average Diastolic BP, standard error and 95% Confidence limits in various Satges Of LMA Insertion

time	Mean	Standard_Error	lower.CL	upper.CL
Before.Induction	70.113	0.599	68.927	71.298
After.Intervention	67.388	0.599	66.202	68.573
After.propofol	64.863	0.599	63.677	66.048
After.LMA	60.875	0.599	59.690	62.060
1.min	61.713	0.599	60.527	62.898
2.min	62.975	0.599	61.790	64.160
3.min	65.863	0.599	64.677	67.048

Table 13. Average Contrast in Diatolic BP within all Subgroups of Stages of LMA Insertion

contrast	estimate	SE	df	t.ratio	p.value
Before.Induction - After.Intervention	2.725	0.427	468	6.385	0.001
Before.Induction - After.propofol	5.250	0.427	468	12.302	0.001
Before.Induction - After.LMA	9.237	0.427	468	21.645	0.001
Before.Induction - 1.min	8.400	0.427	468	19.683	0.001
Before.Induction - 2.min	7.137	0.427	468	16.725	0.001
Before.Induction - 3.min	4.250	0.427	468	9.959	0.001
After.Intervention - After.propofol	2.525	0.427	468	5.917	0.001
After.Intervention - After.LMA	6.512	0.427	468	15.260	0.001
After.Intervention - 1.min	5.675	0.427	468	13.298	0.001
After.Intervention - 2.min	4.412	0.427	468	10.339	0.001
After.Intervention - 3.min	1.525	0.427	468	3.573	0.007
After.propofol - After.LMA	3.987	0.427	468	9.344	0.001
After.propofol - 1.min	3.150	0.427	468	7.381	0.001
After.propofol - 2.min	1.888	0.427	468	4.423	0.001
After.propofol - 3.min	-1.000	0.427	468	-2.343	0.226
After.LMA - 1.min	-0.837	0.427	468	-1.962	0.44
After.LMA - 2.min	-2.100	0.427	468	-4.921	0.001
After.LMA - 3.min	-4.988	0.427	468	-11.687	0.001
1.min - 2.min	-1.263	0.427	468	-2.958	0.05
1.min - 3.min	-4.150	0.427	468	-9.724	0.001
2.min - 3.min	-2.888	0.427	468	-6.766	0.001

Effect On Pulse Rate

Figure 5 Trace-Plot Of variation in Pulse Rate with Time in FentoFol and Ketofol groups

This is a trace-plot of variation in Pulse Rate (on Y axis) with passage of of time of LMA insertion on X-axis , Mean Pulse Rate readings of FentoFol and Ketofol Groups across various stages are connected by distinct colored trace-line . The connected points across the trace represent the mean readings in two groups and Box Plots represents Distribution of Pulse Rates in two groups.

we can see different slopes of variation with Time between Fentofol and KetoFol groups indicating average difference in Pulse Rate across groups varies with Time. Pulse Rate at end of 3 minutes post LMA insertion appears higher in Ketofol Group than Baseline. we decided to explore this intuitive graphical relationship with formal statistical tests.

wo way repeated measures ANOVA was done to assess difference between average value of Pulse rate in Stages/time of LMA Insertion and if there was inter-group differences between 2 Drugs . An interaction test was also conducted to see if inter-group variation of value within time was affected by Drug.
Inter group comparison of average difference between Pulse Rate of 2 Drugs was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(1, 78) = 70.38,p= 0.0001. Intra group comparison of average difference between Pulse rate across Stages/time of LMA Insertion was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(6, 468) = 195.74,p= 0.0001. Interaction of Pulse rate within Stages/time of LMA Insertion with Drug was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(6, 468) = 71.44,p= 0.0001

Since Intra group average differences of Pulse Rate between 2 Drugs was significant. We performed a test of contrasts. The Inter-group difference between FENTOFOL - KETOFOL was significant with mean difference of -14.97+-1.78, pvalue= <0.001

Table 14. Average Pulse Rate, standard error and 95% Confidence limits in DRUG Groups

Drug	Mean	Standard_Error	lower.CL	upper.CL
FENTOFOL	67.150	1.262	64.638	69.662
KETOFOL	82.118	1.262	79.606	84.630

Table 15. Average Contrast in Pulse Rate within DRUG Groups

contrast	estimate	SE	df	t.ratio	p.value
FENTOFOL - KETOFOL	-14.968	1.784	78	-8.389	0

We also wanted to look for a trend in Pulse rate in Stages/time of LMA Insertion since it had a time varying component .We found a non-significant linear trend in intra-group difference with time , (-5.35+-2.96, p value= 0.071). It was qualified by a significant quadratic,cubic and degree 5 and 6 trends indicating a non-linear variation in Pulse Rate with Time (p value= <0.001). The non-linear trend is apparent in plot as well(Clear rise post LMA insertion in both groups followed by subsequent Fall) and it overwhems a linear trend unlike Systolic and Diastolic BP variation where linear trend was visible.. Table of means/standard errors and contrasts is presented below.

Table 16. Average Pulse Rate, standard error and 95% Confidence limits in various Satges Of LMA Insertion

time	Mean	Standard_Error	lower.CL	upper.CL
Before.Induction	71.600	1.031	69.561	73.639
After.Intervention	73.213	1.031	71.173	75.252
After.propofol	69.113	1.031	67.073	71.152
After.LMA	90.538	1.031	88.498	92.577
1.min	78.125	1.031	76.086	80.164
2.min	72.688	1.031	70.648	74.727
3.min	67.163	1.031	65.123	69.202

Table 17. Average Contrast in Pulse Rate within all Subgroups of Stages of LMA Insertion

contrast	estimate	SE	df	t.ratio	p.value
Before.Induction - After.Intervention	-1.613	0.79	468	-2.041	0.39
Before.Induction - After.propofol	2.487	0.79	468	3.149	0.029
Before.Induction - After.LMA	-18.938	0.79	468	-23.973	0.001
Before.Induction - 1.min	-6.525	0.79	468	-8.260	0.001
Before.Induction - 2.min	-1.088	0.79	468	-1.377	0.814
Before.Induction - 3.min	4.437	0.79	468	5.617	0.001
After.Intervention - After.propofol	4.100	0.79	468	5.190	0.001
After.Intervention - After.LMA	-17.325	0.79	468	-21.932	0.001
After.Intervention - 1.min	-4.913	0.79	468	-6.219	0.001
After.Intervention - 2.min	0.525	0.79	468	0.665	0.994
After.Intervention - 3.min	6.050	0.79	468	7.659	0.001
After.propofol - After.LMA	-21.425	0.79	468	-27.122	0.001
After.propofol - 1.min	-9.013	0.79	468	-11.409	0.001
After.propofol - 2.min	-3.575	0.79	468	-4.526	0.001
After.propofol - 3.min	1.950	0.79	468	2.469	0.173
After.LMA - 1.min	12.413	0.79	468	15.713	0.001
After.LMA - 2.min	17.850	0.79	468	22.596	0.001
After.LMA - 3.min	23.375	0.79	468	29.591	0.001
1.min - 2.min	5.438	0.79	468	6.883	0.001
1.min - 3.min	10.963	0.79	468	13.878	0.001
2.min - 3.min	5.525	0.79	468	6.994	0.001

Effect On Mean Arterial Blood Pressure

Figure 6 Trace-Plot Of variation in Mean Arterial BP with Time in FentoFol and Ketofol groups

This is a trace-plot of variation in Mean Arterial Pressure (on Y axis) with passage of of time of LMA insertion on X-axis , MAP readings of FentoFol and Ketofol Groups across various stages are connected by distinct colored trace-line . Individual readings have been plotted on graph and points have been jittered for better clarity . The raw data points representing two groups have different shapes as indicated in the legend. The colored points across the trace represent the mean readings in two groups and whiskers represent Standard error of measurements.

we can clearly see a negative trend/slope indicating a fall with passage of Time. The difference between two Drug Group appears significant,However the Fall in MAP with Time is moderated by effect of Drugs as we can see different slopes of variation with Time between Fentofol and KetoFol groups indicating average difference in Diastolic BP across groups varies with Time. MAP in KetoFol group appear to be relatively stable . we decided to explore this intuitive graphical relationship with formal statistical tests.

Two way repeated measures ANOVA was done to assess difference between average value of MAP across Stages/time of LMA Insertion and if there was inter-group differences between 2 Drugs . An interaction test was also conducted to see if inter-group variation of MAP within Stages/time of LMA Insertion was affected by Drug. Inter group comparison of average difference between MAP of 2 Drugs was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(1, 78) = 76.19,p= 0.0001. Intra group comparison of average difference between MAP with Stages/time of LMA Insertion was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(6, 468) = 213.82,p= 0.0001. Interaction of MAP within time with Drug was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(6, 468) = 142.29,p= 0.0001

Since Intra group average differences of MAP between 2 Drugs was significant. We performed a test of contrasts. The Inter-group difference between FENTOFOL - KETOFOL was significant with mean difference of -7.93+-0.91, pvalue= <0.001

Table 18. Average MAP, standard error and 95% Confidence limits in DRUG Groups

Drug	Mean	Standard_Error	lower.CL	upper.CL
FENTOFOL	78.825	0.643	77.545	80.104
KETOFOL	86.758	0.643	85.479	88.038

Table 19. Average Contrast in MAP within DRUG Groups

contrast	estimate	SE	df	t.ratio	p.value
FENTOFOL - KETOFOL	-5.596	1.059	78	-5.283	0

We also wanted to look for a trend of MAP in Stages/time of LMA Insertion our time group since it had a time varying component .We found a significant Negative linear trend in intra-group difference with time ,() -38.91+-1.44, p value= <0.001).It was qualified by a significant quadratic,cubic and degree 5 and 6 trends indicating a non-linear variation in MAP with Time (p value= <0.001). The non-linear trend is apparent in plot as well where we see that maximum fall occurs post Propofol in Both groups( and MAP continues to fall in FEntoFol Group ,Followed by a late) rise. In KetoFol group MAP remains relatively steady. Table of means/standard errors and contrasts is presented below.

Table 20. Average MAP, standard error and 95% Confidence limits in various Satges Of LMA Insertion

time	Mean	Standard_Error	lower.CL	upper.CL
Before.Induction	89.12	0.52	88.09	90.15
After.Intervention	87.53	0.52	86.50	88.55
After.propofol	81.77	0.52	80.74	82.80
After.LMA	80.28	0.52	79.26	81.31
1.min	78.35	0.52	77.33	79.38
2.min	80.55	0.52	79.52	81.57
3.min	81.94	0.52	80.91	82.97

Table 21. Average Contrast in MAP within all Subgroups of Stages of LMA Insertion

contrast	estimate	SE	df	t.ratio	p.value
Before.Induction - After.Intervention	1.596	0.385	468	4.141	0.001
Before.Induction - After.propofol	7.350	0.385	468	19.073	0.001
Before.Induction - After.LMA	8.838	0.385	468	22.934	0.001
Before.Induction - 1.min	10.766	0.385	468	27.939	0.001
Before.Induction - 2.min	8.575	0.385	468	22.253	0.001
Before.Induction - 3.min	7.179	0.385	468	18.631	0.001
After.Intervention - After.propofol	5.754	0.385	468	14.932	0.001
After.Intervention - After.LMA	7.242	0.385	468	18.793	0.001
After.Intervention - 1.min	9.171	0.385	468	23.798	0.001
After.Intervention - 2.min	6.979	0.385	468	18.112	0.001
After.Intervention - 3.min	5.583	0.385	468	14.490	0.001
After.propofol - After.LMA	1.488	0.385	468	3.861	0.002
After.propofol - 1.min	3.417	0.385	468	8.866	0.001
After.propofol - 2.min	1.226	0.385	468	3.180	0.026
After.propofol - 3.min	-0.171	0.385	468	-0.442	0.999
After.LMA - 1.min	1.929	0.385	468	5.006	0.001
After.LMA - 2.min	-0.262	0.385	468	-0.681	0.994
After.LMA - 3.min	-1.658	0.385	468	-4.303	0.001
1.min - 2.min	-2.191	0.385	468	-5.686	0.001
1.min - 3.min	-3.587	0.385	468	-9.309	0.001
2.min - 3.min	-1.396	0.385	468	-3.623	0.006

Effect On Respiratory Rate

Figure 7 Trace-Plot Of variation in Mean Arterial BP with Time in FentoFol and Ketofol groups

This is a trace-plot of variation in Respiratory Rate (on Y axis) with passage of of time of LMA insertion on X-axis , RR readings of FentoFol and Ketofol Groups across various stages are connected by distinct colored trace-line . Individual readings have been plotted on graph and points have been jittered for better clarity . The raw data points representing two groups have different shapes as indicated in the legend. The colored points across the trace represent the mean readings in two groups and whiskers represent Standard error of measurements.

we can clearly see a positive trend/slope indicating a transient rise with passage of Time in both groups. The difference between two Drug Groups appears significant,we can also see different slopes of variation of Respiratory Rate with Time between Fentofol and KetoFol groups indicating average difference in RR across groups varies with Time. (Rise is more acute in KetoFol group and Fall as well) we decided to explore this intuitive graphical relationship with formal statistical tests.

Two way repeated measures ANOVA was done to assess difference between average Respiratory Rate with and if there was inter-group differences between Drug . An interaction test was also conducted to see if inter-group variation of Respiratory Rate across Stages/time of LMA Insertion was affected by Drug. Since Sphericity (homogeneity of variance between pairs of intra-group comparisons) assumption was not met.Greenhouse-Geisser Correction was applied . Inter group comparison of average difference between Respiratory rate of Drugs(Ketofol and FentoFol) was significant with a p value of 0.0003 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(1, 78) = 14.62,p= 0.0003. Intra group comparison of average difference between Respiratory Rate within Stages/time of LMA Insertion was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(6, 468) = 208.36,p= 0.0001. Interaction of Respiratory Rate within time with Drug was significant with a p value of 0.0001 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(6, 468) = 25.59,p= 0.0001

Since Intra group average differences of Respiratory Rate between Drug groups was significant. We performed a test of contrasts. The Inter-group difference between FENTOFOL - KETOFOL was significant with mean difference of -0.74+-0.19, pvalue= <0.001

Table 22. Average Respiratory Rate, standard error and 95% Confidence limits in DRUG Groups

Drug	Mean	Standard_Error	lower.CL	upper.CL
FENTOFOL	12.279	0.137	12.006	12.551
KETOFOL	13.018	0.137	12.746	13.290

Table 23. Average Contrast in Respiratory Rate between DRUG Groups

contrast	estimate	SE	df	t.ratio	p.value
FENTOFOL - KETOFOL	-0.739	0.193	78	-3.823	0

we also wanted to look for a trend in Respiratory Rate across Stages/time of LMA Insertion since it had a time varying component .We found a significant positive linear trend in intra-group difference in Respiratory with time , 2.69+-0.44, p value= <0.001.t was qualified by a significant quadratic,cubic and degree 5 and 6 trends indicating a non-linear variation in Respiratory Rate with Time (p value= <0.001).Table of means/standard errors and contrasts is presented below.

Table 24. Average RR, standard error and 95% Confidence limits in various Satges Of LMA Insertion

time	Mean	Standard_Error	lower.CL	upper.CL
Before.Induction	11.94	0.12	11.69	12.18
After.Intervention	11.85	0.12	11.61	12.09
After.propofol	11.89	0.12	11.64	12.13
After.LMA	14.78	0.12	14.53	15.02
1.min	13.88	0.12	13.63	14.12
2.min	12.43	0.12	12.18	12.67
3.min	11.79	0.12	11.54	12.03

Table 25. Average Contrast in Respiratory Rate within all Subgroups of Stages of LMA Insertion

contrast	estimate	SE	df	t.ratio	p.value
Before.Induction - After.Intervention	0.087	0.117	468	0.749	0.989
Before.Induction - After.propofol	0.050	0.117	468	0.428	1
Before.Induction - After.LMA	-2.838	0.117	468	-24.276	0.001
Before.Induction - 1.min	-1.938	0.117	468	-16.576	0.001
Before.Induction - 2.min	-0.488	0.117	468	-4.171	0.001
Before.Induction - 3.min	0.150	0.117	468	1.283	0.859
After.Intervention - After.propofol	-0.037	0.117	468	-0.321	1
After.Intervention - After.LMA	-2.925	0.117	468	-25.025	0.001
After.Intervention - 1.min	-2.025	0.117	468	-17.325	0.001
After.Intervention - 2.min	-0.575	0.117	468	-4.919	0.001
After.Intervention - 3.min	0.063	0.117	468	0.535	0.998
After.propofol - After.LMA	-2.887	0.117	468	-24.704	0.001
After.propofol - 1.min	-1.988	0.117	468	-17.004	0.001
After.propofol - 2.min	-0.537	0.117	468	-4.599	0.001
After.propofol - 3.min	0.100	0.117	468	0.856	0.979
After.LMA - 1.min	0.900	0.117	468	7.700	0.001
After.LMA - 2.min	2.350	0.117	468	20.105	0.001
After.LMA - 3.min	2.988	0.117	468	25.560	0.001
1.min - 2.min	1.450	0.117	468	12.405	0.001
1.min - 3.min	2.088	0.117	468	17.860	0.001
2.min - 3.min	0.638	0.117	468	5.454	0.001

Effect On Saturation

Figure 8 Trace-Plot Of variation in Oxygen Saturation with Time in FentoFol and Ketofol groups

This is a trace-plot of variation in Oxygen saturation (on Y axis) with passage of of time of LMA insertion on X-axis , Oxygen Saturation readings of FentoFol and Ketofol Groups across various stages are connected by distinct colored trace-line . Individual readings have been plotted on graph and points have been jittered for better clarity . The raw data points representing two groups have different shapes as indicated in the legend. The colored points across the trace represent the mean readings in two groups and whiskers represent Standard error of measurements.

We cant see a definite trend in variation of oxygen Saturation as there is lot of random variation. we decided to explore this intuitive graphical relationship with formal statistical tests.

Two way repeated measures ANOVA was done to assess difference between average Saturation with passage of of time and if there was differences in oxygen saturation between 2 Drugs . An interaction test was also conducted to see if inter-group variation of Oxygen Saturation within Stages/time of LMA Insertion was affected by Drug. Since Sphericity (homogeneity of variance between pairs of intra-group comparisons) assumption was not met.Greenhouse-Geisser Correction was applied Inter group comparison of average difference between Oxygen saturation of 2 Drugs was non-significant with a p value of 0.190 . In Formal statistical notation it is expressed as F(1, 78) = 1.78,p= 0.190. Intra group comparison of average difference between value of time was non-significant with a p value of 0.830 . Since There was no significant difference within Drug groups or with passage of time (p=0.7) we didnt explore it further.

Other clinical parameters

LMA Insertion Score

Figure 9 Boxplot Of Distribution Of LMA Insertion Score in our Population

In this Figure we see Box plot of LMA_INSERTION_SCORE in 2 sub-groups of DRUG : FENTOFOL and KETOFOL respectively .The individual jittered data points of LMA_INSERTION_SCORE are overlaid over transparent Boxplot for better visualisation. We see distribution of data in individual sub-groups of DRUG based on these box-plots. The lower edge of box plot represents -first quartile (Q1), Horizontal bar represents the median, Upper edge represnts third quartile (Q3), Two black lines (whiskers) emanating from box-plots signify range of non-outlier data for the particular sub-group. Lower whisker represents minimum(Q1- 1.5 interquartile range) non-outlier limit of LMA_INSERTION_SCORE and upper whisker represnts maximum(Q1+1.5interquartile range) of LMA_INSERTION_SCORE .Any data beyond whiskers of box-plots represents outliers in the sub-groups The big brown point in the box-plots represents mean LMA_INSERTION_SCORE of 2 groups and it has been annotated in the figure itself . Summary Statistics of the groups is presented in table below

Table 26 Summary Table Of LMA INSERTION SCORE within Groups

Group	n	Mean	SD	Median	Minimum	Maximum
FENTOFOL	40	6.925	0.859	7	6	9
KETOFOL	40	7.350	0.893	7	6	9

We formally performed a Welch’s independent Sample T test between Two Groups. The mean in FENTOFOL [ 6.9 ± 0.85 ] was significantly lower than KETOFOL Group [ 7.35 ± 0.89] . The mean difference was 0.425 . The p value was <0.03 . The t statistic was 2.116 and degree of freedom of the Welch unpaired two-sample t test was 77.88 .In Formal statistical notation this result is expressed as : t(77.88) = 2.16, p= 0.0331. The detailed statistical parameters of T test are given in table below.

TABLE 27

variable	group1	group2	statistic	df	p
LMA_INSERTION_SCORE	FENTOFOL	KETOFOL	-2.17	77.88	0.03

APNEA

Figure 10 Distribution Of APNEA IN TWO GROUPS

The Grouped Pie chart above represents individual counts representing frequency of APNEA categories Apnea and No_Apnea in categories FENTOFOL and KETOFOL . Subgroup No_Apnea has highest percentage 31/40 ( 78 % ) in group FENTOFOL . Subgroup No_Apnea has highest percentage 40/40 ( 100 % ) in group KETOFOL . To formally check for association between groups we performed pearson chi-square test .

we found a Significant association between APNEA and DRUG. The chi-square statistic was 8.01 . The degree of freedom was 1 and P value was <0.001 .Contingency and Proportion table are shown below

Table 28

DRUG	APNEA	n	value	95 % Confidence Interval
FENTOFOL	Apnea	35	35/40 ( 87.5 %)	74.75% - 95.07%
FENTOFOL	No_Apnea	5	5/40 ( 12.5 %)	4.93% - 25.25%
KETOFOL	No_Apnea	40	40/40 ( 100 %)	93.95% - 100%

ADDITIONAL PROPOFOL REQUIRED

Figure 11 Distribution Of ADDITIONAL PROPOFOL REQUIREMENT IN TWO GROUPS

The Grouped Pie chart above represents individual counts representing frequency of PROPOFOL REQUIREment categories in categories FENTOFOL and KETOFOL . No Propofol requirement was seen in 29/40 ( 72.5 % ) in group FENTOFOL .No Propofol requirement was seen in 37/40 ( 92.5 % ) in group KETOFOLL . To formally check for association between groups we performed pearson chi-square test .

we found a Significant association between ADDITIONAL_PROPOFOL_REQUIRED and DRUG. The chi-square statistic was 4.24 . The degree of freedom was 1 and P value was 0.04 .Contingency and Proportion table are shown below

Table 29

DRUG	ADDITIONAL_PROPOFOL_REQUIRED	n	value	95 % Confidence Interval
FENTOFOL	No	29	29/40 ( 72.5 %)	57.45% - 84.42%
FENTOFOL	Yes	11	11/40 ( 27.5 %)	15.58% - 42.55%
KETOFOL	No	37	37/40 ( 92.5 %)	81.32% - 97.84%
KETOFOL	Yes	3	3/40 ( 7.5 %)	2.16% - 18.68%

Table 30

	FENTOFOL	KETOFOL
No	29	37
Yes	11	3