This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Connelly, N. R. Articles by Brull, S. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Connelly, N. R. Articles by Brull, S. J.

Subjective Responses to Train-of-Four and Double Burst Stimulation in Awake Patients

Department of Anesthesiology, Yale University School of Medicine, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut.

Abstract

The present study was undertaken to determine whether the discomfort associated with the sequential bursts of stimuli comprising the two recommended forms of double burst stimulation (DBS) is comparable to that associated with the repetitive stimuli of train-of-four (TOF). Twenty-one un-medicated volunteers rated on a visual analog scale the discomfort associated with randomly applied DBS and TOF stimulations at 20, 30 and 50 mA. All participants were blinded to the mode of stimulation, as well as to the current intensity. At each amperage tested, TOF produced significantly less discomfort than either form of DBS (P < 0.01). Stimulation at 50 mA produced median visual analog scale scores of 7.5, 7.0, and 5.0 for DBS_3.2' DBS_3.3' and TOF, respectively. At 30 mA the corresponding median visual analog scale scores were 4.5, 5.5, and 3.0, whereas at 20 mA the scores were 4.0, 4.5, and 2.0, respectively. Thus, DBS is more uncomfortable than TOF at each current tested; however, in light of reports of its higher sensitivity, DBS may be the preferred means of assessing neuromuscular function in the awake as well as the anesthetized patient when a force transducer and recorder are not readily available.

Key Words: MEASUREMENT TECHNIQUES, NEUROMUSCULAR—train-of-four, double burst stimulation • NEUROMUSCULAR TRANSMISSION, MEASUREMENTS—train-of-four, double burst stimulation

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. S. Murphy, J. W. Szokol, J. H. Marymont, S. B. Greenberg, M. J. Avram, and J. S. Vender Residual Neuromuscular Blockade and Critical Respiratory Events in the Postanesthesia Care Unit Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2008; 107(1): 130 - 137. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. S. Murphy, J. W. Szokol, J. H. Marymont, M. Franklin, M. J. Avram, and J. S. Vender Residual Paralysis at the Time of Tracheal Extubation Anesth. Analg., June 1, 2005; 100(6): 1840 - 1845. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Baillard, S. Bourdiau, P. Le Toumelin, F. Ait Kaci, B. Riou, M. Cupa, and C. M. Samama Assessing Residual Neuromuscular Blockade Using Acceleromyography Can Be Deceptive in Postoperative Awake Patients Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2004; 98(3): 854 - 7. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. M. Hemmerling, G. Michaud, S. Deschamps, G. Trager, and K. S. Kim Do We Need to Intubate the Trachea 2 Minutes after Vecuronium 0.1 mg/kg in Elective Surgery? * Response Anesth. Analg., November 1, 2003; 97(5): 1544 - 1545. [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. S. Kim, M. A. Cheong, J. W. Jeon, J. H. Lee, and J. C. Shim The Dose Effect of Ephedrine on the Onset Time of Vecuronium Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2003; 96(4): 1042 - 1046. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. S. Kim, S. H. Lew, H. Y. Cho, and M. A. Cheong Residual Paralysis Induced by Either Vecuronium or Rocuronium After Reversal with Pyridostigmine Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2002; 95(6): 1656 - 1660. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]