Trial reportBritish journal of anaesthesia2023
Breathe-squeeze: pharmacodynamics of a stimulus-free behavioural paradigm to track conscious states during sedation
Trial report in British journal of anaesthesia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04206059 (Closed Loop Acoustic Stimulation During Sedation With Dexmedetomidine), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
Closed Loop Acoustic Stimulation During Sedation With Dexmedetomidine
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dreaming during anaesthesia: a scoping review.British journal of anaesthesia · 2026Article
- Clinical Electroencephalography for Anesthesiologists and Intensivists: Part 2-Physiologic Signatures and Active Management.Anesthesiology · 2025Review
- REcovery from DEXmedetomidine-Induced Unresponsiveness (REDEX): A Study Protocol for a Single Center, Parallel Arm, Non-Randomized, Controlled Pilot Trial in Healthy Volunteers.Nature and science of sleep · 2025Article
- Daytime dexmedetomidine sedation with closed-loop acoustic stimulation alters slow wave sleep homeostasis in healthy adults.BJA open · 2024Article
- Closed-loop control of anesthetic state in nonhuman primates.PNAS nexus · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConscious states are typically inferred through responses to auditory tasks and noxious stimulation. We report the use of a stimulus-free behavioural paradigm to track state transitions in responsiveness during dexmedetomidine sedation. We hypothesised that estimated dexmedetomidine effect-site (Ce) concentrations would be higher at loss of responsiveness (LOR) compared with return of responsiveness (ROR), and both would be lower than comparable studies that used stimulus-based assessments.
methodsClosed-Loop Acoustic Stimulation during Sedation with Dexmedetomidine data were analysed for secondary analysis. Fourteen healthy volunteers were asked to perform the breathe-squeeze task of gripping a dynamometer when inspiring and releasing it when expiring. LOR was defined as five inspirations without accompanied squeezes; ROR was defined as the return of five inspirations accompanied by squeezes. Brain states were monitored using 64-channel EEG. Dexmedetomidine was administered as a target-controlled infusion, with Ce estimated from a pharmacokinetic model.
resultsCounter to our hypothesis, mean estimated dexmedetomidine Ce was lower at LOR (0.92 ng ml
conclusionsThe breathe-squeeze task can effectively track changes in responsiveness during sedation without external stimuli and might be more sensitive to state changes than stimulus-based tasks. It should be considered when perturbation of brain states is undesirable. CLINICAL
trial registrationNCT04206059.
Indexed as
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.