OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the Entropy Module (GE Healthcare, Helsinki, Finland), a device to measure hypnosis in anesthesia, is a valid measure of sedation state in critically ill patients by comparing clinically assessed sedation state with Spectral Entropy DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Teaching hospital general ICU. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: 30 intubated, mechanically ventilated patients without primary neurological diagnoses or drug overdose receiving continuous sedation. INTERVENTIONS: Monitoring of EEG and fEMG activity via forehead electrodes for up to 72h and assessments of conscious level using a modified Ramsay Sedation Scale. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: 475 trained observer assessments were made and compared with concurrent Entropy numbers. Median State (SE) and Response (RE) Entropy values decreased as Ramsay score increased, but wide variation occurred, especially in Ramsay 4-6 categories. Discrimination between different sedation scores [mean (SEM) P(K) value: RE 0.713 (0.019); SE 0.710 (0.019)] and between lighter (Ramsay 1-3) vs.deeper (Ramsay 4-6) sedation ranges was inadequate [P(K): RE 0.750 (0.025); SE 0.748 (0.025)]. fEMG power decreased with increasing Ramsay score but was often significant even at Ramsay 4-6 states. Frequent "on-off" effects occurred for both RE and SE, which were associated with fEMG activity. Values switched from low to high values even in deeply sedated patients. High Entropy values during deeper sedation were strongly associated with simultaneous high relative fEMG powers. CONCLUSIONS: Entropy of the frontal EEG does not discriminate sedation state adequately for clinical use in ICU patients. Facial EMG is a major confounder in clinical sedation ranges.
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the Entropy Module (GE Healthcare, Helsinki, Finland), a device to measure hypnosis in anesthesia, is a valid measure of sedation state in critically illpatients by comparing clinically assessed sedation state with Spectral Entropy DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Teaching hospital general ICU. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: 30 intubated, mechanically ventilated patients without primary neurological diagnoses or drug overdose receiving continuous sedation. INTERVENTIONS: Monitoring of EEG and fEMG activity via forehead electrodes for up to 72h and assessments of conscious level using a modified Ramsay Sedation Scale. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: 475 trained observer assessments were made and compared with concurrent Entropy numbers. Median State (SE) and Response (RE) Entropy values decreased as Ramsay score increased, but wide variation occurred, especially in Ramsay 4-6 categories. Discrimination between different sedation scores [mean (SEM) P(K) value: RE 0.713 (0.019); SE 0.710 (0.019)] and between lighter (Ramsay 1-3) vs.deeper (Ramsay 4-6) sedation ranges was inadequate [P(K): RE 0.750 (0.025); SE 0.748 (0.025)]. fEMG power decreased with increasing Ramsay score but was often significant even at Ramsay 4-6 states. Frequent "on-off" effects occurred for both RE and SE, which were associated with fEMG activity. Values switched from low to high values even in deeply sedated patients. High Entropy values during deeper sedation were strongly associated with simultaneous high relative fEMG powers. CONCLUSIONS: Entropy of the frontal EEG does not discriminate sedation state adequately for clinical use in ICU patients. Facial EMG is a major confounder in clinical sedation ranges.
Authors: H Viertiö-Oja; V Maja; M Särkelä; P Talja; N Tenkanen; H Tolvanen-Laakso; M Paloheimo; A Vakkuri; A Yli-Hankala; P Meriläinen Journal: Acta Anaesthesiol Scand Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 2.105
Authors: E Wesley Ely; Brenda Truman; Donna J Manzi; Jeffrey C Sigl; Ayumi Shintani; Gordon R Bernard Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2004-05-04 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Frank A Rasulo; Philip Hopkins; Francisco A Lobo; Pierre Pandin; Basil Matta; Carla Carozzi; Stefano Romagnoli; Anthony Absalom; Rafael Badenes; Thomas Bleck; Anselmo Caricato; Jan Claassen; André Denault; Cristina Honorato; Saba Motta; Geert Meyfroidt; Finn Michael Radtke; Zaccaria Ricci; Chiara Robba; Fabio S Taccone; Paul Vespa; Ida Nardiello; Massimo Lamperti Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2022-07-27 Impact factor: 3.532
Authors: Sunil Belur Nagaraj; Lauren M McClain; Emily J Boyle; David W Zhou; Sowmya M Ramaswamy; Siddharth Biswal; Oluwaseun Akeju; Patrick L Purdon; M Brandon Westover Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2018-03-07 Impact factor: 4.538
Authors: Matthias Haenggi; Heidi Ypparila-Wolters; Christine Bieri; Carola Steiner; Jukka Takala; Ilkka Korhonen; Stephan M Jakob Journal: Crit Care Date: 2008-09-16 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Matthias Haenggi; Heidi Ypparila-Wolters; Kathrin Hauser; Claudio Caviezel; Jukka Takala; Ilkka Korhonen; Stephan M Jakob Journal: Crit Care Date: 2009-02-19 Impact factor: 9.097