The purpose of this study is to examine the precision, bias and limits of agreement when monitoring the neuromuscular block with acceleromyography with and without preload and compare the method to the gold standard, mechanomyography.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
60
Randomization of acceleromyography with or without Hand Adapter to dominant or non-dominant arm. Contralateral neuromuscular transmission is measured with mechanomyography (The gold standard of neuromuscular monitoring)
placebo
Dep. of anesthesia, HOC, Rigshospitalet
Copenhagen, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark
The precision of acceleromyography with and without preload during recovery
Bias and limits of agreement for acceleromyography (AMG) with and without preload compared to mechanomyography (MMG) during recovery
All the following outcomes obtained with AMG with and without preload are compared to MMG. Furthermore the responses are compared when the AMG-values are "normalized":
Bias og limits of agreement between control TOF
Onset time
Time to reappearance of T1, T2, T3 and T4
Twitch height of T1 at reappearance of T1, T2, T3 and T4
Time to T1=25%
Interval 25-75%
Time to TOF-ratio = 0.9 and 1.0
Time to final T1
Time to final TOF ratio
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.