Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28456907›Full record

Observational studySupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2017

Bispectral Index monitoring in cancer patients undergoing palliative sedation: a preliminary report.

Edith Monreal-Carrillo, Silvia Allende-Pérez, David Hui, Maria-Fernanda García-Salamanca, Eduardo Bruera, Emma Verástegui

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Palliative sedation: beliefs and decision-making among Spanish palliative care physicians.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Edith Monreal-CarrilloDepartment of Palliative Care, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Avenida San Fernando 22, 14080, Mexico City, Mexico.
Silvia Allende-PérezDepartment of Palliative Care, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Avenida San Fernando 22, 14080, Mexico City, Mexico.
David HuiDepartment of Palliative Care and Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Texas at MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Maria-Fernanda García-SalamancaDepartment of Palliative Care, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Avenida San Fernando 22, 14080, Mexico City, Mexico.
Eduardo BrueraDepartment of Palliative Care and Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Texas at MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Emma VerásteguiDepartment of Palliative Care, Instituto Nacional de Cancerología, Avenida San Fernando 22, 14080, Mexico City, Mexico. everasteguia@incan.edu.mx.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3396-1783
Instituto Nacional de Cancerología · MXThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionContinuous palliative sedation (PS) is currently titrated based on clinical observation; however, it is often unclear if patients are still aware of their suffering. The aim of this prospective study is to characterize the level of consciousness in patients undergoing PS using Bispectral Index (BIS) monitoring. PATIENTS AND

methodsWe enrolled consecutive patients with refractory symptoms requiring PS. We documented the level of sedation using Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) and BIS at 0, 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 h during the first day of PS and examined their degree of association. Intravenous midazolam or propofol was titrated according to the sedation level.

resultsTwenty patients on PS were recruited and had BIS continuous monitoring. Delirium was the most frequent reason for PS (n = 15, 75%). The median time of sedation was 24.5 h (interquartile range 6-46). The average time to achieve the desired sedation level was 6 h, and dose titration was required in 80% of the cases. At baseline, 14 (70%) patients were considered to be awake according to RSS (i.e., 1-3) and 19 (95%) were awake according to BIS (i.e., >60%). This proportion decreased to 31 and 56% at 4 h, 27% and 53 at 6 h, and 22 and 33% at 24 h. RS and BIS had moderate correlation (rho = -0.58 to -0.65); however, a small proportion of patients were found to be awake by BIS (i.e., ≥60%) despite clinical observation (i.e., RSS 4-6) indicating otherwise.

conclusionsThe BIS is a noninvasive, bedside, real-time continuous monitoring method that may facilitate the objective assessment of level of consciousness and dose titration in patients undergoing PS.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAwarenessCancer PainConsciousnessDeliriumElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansHypnotics and SedativesMaleMidazolamMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicNeoplasmsPalliative CareHypnotics and SedativesMidazolamPropofolBispectral Index (BIS)Palliative sedationRamsayTerminal cancer

Identifiers

PMID28456907
OpenAlexW2609129448

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.