ArticleCritical care research and practice2021
Responsiveness Index versus the RASS-Based Method for Adjusting Sedation in Critically Ill Patients.
Article in Critical care research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06667869 (Sistema de monitorización multiparámetros Para sedación de Pacientes críticos en UCI), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Sistema de monitorización multiparámetros Para sedación de Pacientes críticos en UCI (ROMANTIC: multipaRameter mOnitoring systeM for sedAtion iNThe ICu)
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluation of Objective Sedation Monitoring Practices in Critically Ill Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Critical care explorations · 2025Pooled it
- The impact of sedation and analgesia scores on prognosis in critically ill sepsis patients with sepsis-associated encephalopathy: a retrospective analysis.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Novel insights on association and reactivity of Bispectral Index, frontal electromyogram, and autonomic responses in nociception-sedation monitoring of critical care patients.BMC anesthesiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSedation of intensive care patients is needed for patient safety, but deep sedation is associated with adverse outcomes. Frontal electromyogram-based Responsiveness Index (RI) aims to quantify the level of sedation and is scaled 0-100 (low index indicates deep sedation). We compared RI-based sedation to Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale- (RASS-) based sedation. Our hypothesis was that RI-controlled sedation would be associated with increased total time alive without mechanical ventilation at 30 days without an increased number of adverse events.
methods32 critically ill adult patients with mechanical ventilation and administration of sedation were randomized to either RI- or RASS-guided sedation. Patients received propofol and oxycodone, if possible. The following standardized sedation protocol was utilized in both groups to achieve the predetermined target sedation level: either RI 40-80 (RI group) or RASS -3 to 0 (RASS group). RI measurement was blinded in the RASS group, and the RI group was blinded to RASS assessments. State Entropy (SE) values were registered in both groups.
resultsRI and RASS groups did not differ in total time alive in 30 days without mechanical ventilation (
conclusionFurther studies with a larger sample size are warranted to scrutinize the optimal RI level during different phases of critical illness.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.