The history of modern anesthesia technology – A critical reappraisal (Part II) An international comparison of contemporary devices and of nitrous-oxide-based anesthesia (c. 1900–1930s)- recognizing another changing evidence-base

This paper is the continuation (Part 2) of an extensive, critical reappraisal of the international historiography on modern anesthesia and its technology. The first paper of this series provided general definitions, backgrounds and an update on recent research on one aspect of this topic: the history of professionalization / specialization (Part 1).¹ This paper goes on to provide a first, international comparison of entire anesthesia devices and on the history of nitrous-oxide-based anesthesia (c. 1900–1930s). Results: A comparative chronology of internationally recognized milestones of entire anesthesia machines does not suggest significant differences between the nations of continental Europe on one side, or the USA and Britain on the other. The international historiography on one of the key techniques for which these devices were designed (nitrous-oxide-based anesthesia), is likewise demonstrably biased. These findings are further evidence that a frequently held hypothesis, which suggests national dominances in these fields, is incorrect. Contributing factors and wider contexts of this phenomenon can be further confirmed: These are an under-recognition of non-Anglo-American (particularly continental-European) and of primarily surgical contributions; contemporary international conflicts and inter-professional demarcation disputes. In addition, it can be shown that these phenomena had already started around the same time (c. 1900s–1930s). There also is evidence to suggest that they were at times reciprocal and quite deliberate. The author illustrates and argues that the currently prevalent historiography on modern anesthesia requires a thorough reassessment. This should be based on a perspective of internationalism and transdisciplinary reciprocity and should recognize much broader historical contexts.