HealthyPhase 4NCT00321360
Effect Site Controlled, Reaction Time Safeguarded, Patient Maintained Sedation With Propofol in Healthy Volunteers
A Phase 4 study testing Propofol and Patient maintained sedation in people with Healthy, run by Sonia Allam at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
Whether patient-maintained sedation (the patient controls his/her degree of sedation using a hand-held device) using the drug propofol is safer and more effective when using deteriorating reaction time as an added safeguard against the small potential for over sedation in a group of healthy volunteers. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 50 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Healthy
- What is being tested?
- Propofol and Patient maintained sedation
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- May 2006to Sep 2006
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 50 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- ASA I or II (healthy or mild systemic illness) healthy volunteers
- Age 18 - 50
Who cannot join
- ASA III or above
- Out with age group above
- Contraindication to propofol
- History of epilepsy
- History of substance abuse
- Major Psychiatric illness
Show all 10Show fewer
- Pregnancy or breastfeeding
- Unable or unwilling to give informed consent
- Unable to use necessary apparatus
- Vulnerable groups
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Reaction Time Monitored Patient Maintained Propofol Sedation: a Volunteer Safety Study
Whether patient-maintained sedation (the patient controls his/her degree of sedation using a hand-held device) using the drug propofol is safer and more effective when using deteriorating reaction time as an added safeguard against the small potential for over sedation in a group of healthy volunteers.
Read the detailed description
Patients receiving conscious sedation for dentistry and endoscopy are usually treated with intermittent bolus doses of intravenous midazolam (administered by the operator-sedationist). The safety of such a regime has been questioned with reports of up to 13 % of patients desaturating to below 80 % in the recovery area following sedation for endoscopy. Mortality occurs in 0.05 % of endoscopy patients (with approximately 60 % of this being due to hypoxaemia). The aim of our work, therefore, is to look at providing sedation that is both safer as well as being efficacious.
The drug propofol, the agent most commonly used to induce general anaesthesia in the UK, is also frequently administered intravenously by anaesthetists in low doses to provide conscious sedation for patients undergoing unpleasant procedures i.e. patients become relaxed, anxiety-free, but maintain verbal contact throughout.
The technique of patient maintained sedation using the drug propofol (the patient can increase the amount of sedation (and propofol) they receive by pressing a demand button attached to a standard infusion device) has been used by anaesthetists and evaluated since 1997.
Several recent studies published and submitted for publication by this research group on patient maintained sedation using the drug propofol have shown this method of sedation to be safe and effective in dental patients (over 120 patients studied and no cases of over sedation). It was also shown that this method, when compared to the established method of sedation in oral surgery (the dentist administering doses of midazolam intravenously), produced both quicker recovery and less anxiety prior to the surgery.
The routine use of propofol traditionally is restricted to anaesthetists, as in much higher doses general anaesthesia is produced with possible loss of airway patency. Currently the safety feature is predominantly that as patients become more sedated they cannot press the patient demand button and hence cannot increase the amount of propofol they are receiving. Also the device ensures that the blood and brain concentrations have equilibrated to within 10% of each other before another successful demand for propofol can be made (usually takes approximately two minutes) and it only allows a maximum calculated brain concentration of 3 micrograms/milliliter of propofol. The device also will start to decrease the calculated brain concentration of propofol if the demand button has not been pressed for six minutes.
Despite the encouraging results above we also found in a recent pilot study involving 20 healthy volunteers who were instructed to try and make themselves unconscious that there were 2 cases of over sedation (of these one briefly lost verbal contact and the other required supplemental oxygen for a short time only). This however was not unsafe in the presence of an anaesthetist. Over sedation, however, was never demonstrated with any of the oral surgery patients in the previous studies. This may have been due to a higher level of anxiety in dental patients affecting response to propofol.
We have therefore incorporated an additional safety feature into the existing and previously studied patient maintained sedation system which may further decrease or eliminate this small risk of over sedation. All the above safety features are retained and in addition the patient demand button will now also be used to monitor reaction time at one minutely intervals.
It is known that propofol slows the reaction time of a given individual and in another recent study of 40 patients undergoing general anaesthesia for planned surgery using propofol, the patients' reaction times were recorded both awake and during induction of anaesthesia by instructing the patients to press a handheld button as quickly as possible in response to the handset vibrating. The calculated effect site (brain) concentration of propofol was increased incrementally and reaction time monitored at each stage until the patient could no longer press the button.
The data from this study (deteriorating patient reaction time with increased brain concentration of propofol) was analysed and this information used to provide an additional safeguard within the system to prevent over sedation i.e. a patient's reaction time deterioration by a certain percentage will prevent himself or herself being able to self-administer more propofol. Furthermore the system will actually start to decrease the brain concentration of propofol once the patients' reaction time becomes too slow. The patient demand button will be used to monitor reaction time at one minutely intervals as well as administer more propofol.
We hope that this will eliminate the small risk of over sedation and wish to recruit a further 20 healthy volunteers to assess the safety and efficacy of this reaction time safeguarded, patient-maintained sedation system.
After expressing an interest to be recruited each volunteer will be given the volunteer information leaflet about the research to take home and read. The volunteer will be given ample opportunity to ask any questions regarding the research and to give informed written consent at the study visit.
The volunteer will then have an intravenous cannula sited and will have routine monitoring applied for continuous observation (blood pressure, ECG and oxygen saturation). The cannula will be connected to an effect-site controlled infusion system consisting of a Graseby 3400 infusion pump and a backbar microprocessor (into which the patient's age and weight are entered), programmed with the pharmacokinetic data describing the distribution and elimination of propofol. The microprocessor will also be connected to the investigator's laptop. Whilst the volunteer is connected to the propofol infusion, an experienced anaesthetist (with FRCA qualification) and a trained assistant will be in constant attendance. There will be ready access to all appropriate resuscitation equipment and drugs. Recordings of the patient's vital signs on a data collection sheet will be made prior to sedation and then every 5 minutes until the sedation period ends (see supplements). The anaesthetist will also record the volunteer's sedation score at each reaction time challenge (see supplements). For each reaction time challenge the actual reaction time and corresponding effect site (brain) concentration will be logged onto the laptop.
The way the device works will be explained and the volunteer will be given a handset to hold which has a button on top. They will hold this throughout the procedure. The handset will vibrate at intervals of one minute throughout the procedure and the volunteer will be instructed to press the button twice (double click) as soon as the handset vibrates in order to record the volunteer's reaction time. Three baseline reaction times will be recorded prior to sedation, the first value discarded and the second two values averaged to give the baseline reaction time. We will also tell them that the way to demand more propofol during the sedation period is by also pressing the button twice within one second.
The device will then be set to achieve an effect-site (brain) concentration of 1.0 micrograms/millilitre (mcg/ml). Once this effect concentration has been achieved the control button will be activated for administration of propofol and the volunteer will be instructed to "try to make yourself unconscious". The volunteer can increase the effect site concentration by 0.2 mcg/ml with each successful double press (up to a maximum of 3 mcg/ml).
A double press will only be successful once between reaction time measurements and provided blood and brain concentrations of propofol have equilibrated to within 10% of each other and provided reaction time does not become more prolonged than 150% of the baseline value. In this case no further drug increments will be permitted and effect site concentration will be maintained at the same level for two minutes after which time a successful demand press would only occur if reaction time became less than 150% again. In addition an even more prolonged reaction time of greater than 200% from baseline would actually lead to a reduction in effect site concentration of propofol.
If the volunteer becomes unresponsive to verbal command or reaches the set maximum effect site concentration of 3 mcg/ml, or in the unlikely event the volunteer desaturates to a level below 90% or shows any other signs of respiratory depression, the infusion will be ended. The volunteer will be looked after by the anaesthetist (ensuring that the airway is maintained, supplemental oxygen is given and ventilation is adequate) until awake and responsive to speech and at this point they will be taken to the sedation suite recovery room.
Otherwise the sedation period will end after a 30 minute period or once the device has decreased the brain concentration of propofol on three successive occasions (due to reaction time slowing).
The volunteer will then be transferred to a recovery area, where they will be monitored until ready for discharge according to sedation suite criteria. Just prior to discharge volunteers will complete a short questionnaire to assess recall and satisfaction (see supplements).
As stated on volunteer information leaflet, volunteers can withdraw from the study at any time without giving a reason and without their care being in any way affected.
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
PropofolDrug
Patient maintained sedationDevice
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Minimal Sedation Level obtained (modified Objective Observer's Assessment of Sedation)
Maximal change in oxygen saturation (SpO2)
Secondary outcomes (6)
The maximal effect site concentration of propofol at which the minimal sedation level and maximal change in oxygen saturation were achieved
Relationship between reaction time, sedation level and effect site concentration of propofol
Requirement for supplementary oxygen (if SpO2 < 90%)
Requirement for airway or ventilatory support
Maximal change in heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR) and blood pressure (BP)
Volunteer satisfaction and recollection
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 May 2006 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2006
- Primary completionSep 2006
- Study completionSep 2006
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for HealthyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Sonia Allam
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Sonia Allam, University of Glasgow
- Investigators
- Sonia Allam, MB ChB FRCA, Principal investigator, University of Glasgow Dept of Anaesthesia
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00321360
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 9813
- Status last verified
- Feb 2012
- First submitted
- 1 May 2006
- Last updated
- 7 Feb 2012
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 Feb 2012. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Reaction Time Monitored Patient Maintained Propofol Sedation: a Volunteer Safety Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00321360
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 9813
- Conditions
- Healthy
- Keywords
- propofol, sedation
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Sonia AllamUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde
- Study start
- May 2006
- Primary completion
- Sep 2006 (actual)
- Study completion
- Sep 2006 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 May 2006 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Whether patient-maintained sedation (the patient controls his/her degree of sedation using a hand-held device) using the drug propofol is safer and more effective when using deteriorating reaction time as an added safeguard against the small potential for over sedation in a group of healthy volunteers.
Detailed description
Patients receiving conscious sedation for dentistry and endoscopy are usually treated with intermittent bolus doses of intravenous midazolam (administered by the operator-sedationist). The safety of such a regime has been questioned with reports of up to 13 % of patients desaturating to below 80 % in the recovery area following sedation for endoscopy. Mortality occurs in 0.05 % of endoscopy patients (with approximately 60 % of this being due to hypoxaemia). The aim of our work, therefore, is to look at providing sedation that is both safer as well as being efficacious.
The drug propofol, the agent most commonly used to induce general anaesthesia in the UK, is also frequently administered intravenously by anaesthetists in low doses to provide conscious sedation for patients undergoing unpleasant procedures i.e. patients become relaxed, anxiety-free, but maintain verbal contact throughout.
The technique of patient maintained sedation using the drug propofol (the patient can increase the amount of sedation (and propofol) they receive by pressing a demand button attached to a standard infusion device) has been used by anaesthetists and evaluated since 1997.
Several recent studies published and submitted for publication by this research group on patient maintained sedation using the drug propofol have shown this method of sedation to be safe and effective in dental patients (over 120 patients studied and no cases of over sedation). It was also shown that this method, when compared to the established method of sedation in oral surgery (the dentist administering doses of midazolam intravenously), produced both quicker recovery and less anxiety prior to the surgery.
The routine use of propofol traditionally is restricted to anaesthetists, as in much higher doses general anaesthesia is produced with possible loss of airway patency. Currently the safety feature is predominantly that as patients become more sedated they cannot press the patient demand button and hence cannot increase the amount of propofol they are receiving. Also the device ensures that the blood and brain concentrations have equilibrated to within 10% of each other before another successful demand for propofol can be made (usually takes approximately two minutes) and it only allows a maximum calculated brain concentration of 3 micrograms/milliliter of propofol. The device also will start to decrease the calculated brain concentration of propofol if the demand button has not been pressed for six minutes.
Despite the encouraging results above we also found in a recent pilot study involving 20 healthy volunteers who were instructed to try and make themselves unconscious that there were 2 cases of over sedation (of these one briefly lost verbal contact and the other required supplemental oxygen for a short time only). This however was not unsafe in the presence of an anaesthetist. Over sedation, however, was never demonstrated with any of the oral surgery patients in the previous studies. This may have been due to a higher level of anxiety in dental patients affecting response to propofol.
We have therefore incorporated an additional safety feature into the existing and previously studied patient maintained sedation system which may further decrease or eliminate this small risk of over sedation. All the above safety features are retained and in addition the patient demand button will now also be used to monitor reaction time at one minutely intervals.
It is known that propofol slows the reaction time of a given individual and in another recent study of 40 patients undergoing general anaesthesia for planned surgery using propofol, the patients' reaction times were recorded both awake and during induction of anaesthesia by instructing the patients to press a handheld button as quickly as possible in response to the handset vibrating. The calculated effect site (brain) concentration of propofol was increased incrementally and reaction time monitored at each stage until the patient could no longer press the button.
The data from this study (deteriorating patient reaction time with increased brain concentration of propofol) was analysed and this information used to provide an additional safeguard within the system to prevent over sedation i.e. a patient's reaction time deterioration by a certain percentage will prevent himself or herself being able to self-administer more propofol. Furthermore the system will actually start to decrease the brain concentration of propofol once the patients' reaction time becomes too slow. The patient demand button will be used to monitor reaction time at one minutely intervals as well as administer more propofol.
We hope that this will eliminate the small risk of over sedation and wish to recruit a further 20 healthy volunteers to assess the safety and efficacy of this reaction time safeguarded, patient-maintained sedation system.
After expressing an interest to be recruited each volunteer will be given the volunteer information leaflet about the research to take home and read. The volunteer will be given ample opportunity to ask any questions regarding the research and to give informed written consent at the study visit.
The volunteer will then have an intravenous cannula sited and will have routine monitoring applied for continuous observation (blood pressure, ECG and oxygen saturation). The cannula will be connected to an effect-site controlled infusion system consisting of a Graseby 3400 infusion pump and a backbar microprocessor (into which the patient's age and weight are entered), programmed with the pharmacokinetic data describing the distribution and elimination of propofol. The microprocessor will also be connected to the investigator's laptop. Whilst the volunteer is connected to the propofol infusion, an experienced anaesthetist (with FRCA qualification) and a trained assistant will be in constant attendance. There will be ready access to all appropriate resuscitation equipment and drugs. Recordings of the patient's vital signs on a data collection sheet will be made prior to sedation and then every 5 minutes until the sedation period ends (see supplements). The anaesthetist will also record the volunteer's sedation score at each reaction time challenge (see supplements). For each reaction time challenge the actual reaction time and corresponding effect site (brain) concentration will be logged onto the laptop.
The way the device works will be explained and the volunteer will be given a handset to hold which has a button on top. They will hold this throughout the procedure. The handset will vibrate at intervals of one minute throughout the procedure and the volunteer will be instructed to press the button twice (double click) as soon as the handset vibrates in order to record the volunteer's reaction time. Three baseline reaction times will be recorded prior to sedation, the first value discarded and the second two values averaged to give the baseline reaction time. We will also tell them that the way to demand more propofol during the sedation period is by also pressing the button twice within one second.
The device will then be set to achieve an effect-site (brain) concentration of 1.0 micrograms/millilitre (mcg/ml). Once this effect concentration has been achieved the control button will be activated for administration of propofol and the volunteer will be instructed to "try to make yourself unconscious". The volunteer can increase the effect site concentration by 0.2 mcg/ml with each successful double press (up to a maximum of 3 mcg/ml).
A double press will only be successful once between reaction time measurements and provided blood and brain concentrations of propofol have equilibrated to within 10% of each other and provided reaction time does not become more prolonged than 150% of the baseline value. In this case no further drug increments will be permitted and effect site concentration will be maintained at the same level for two minutes after which time a successful demand press would only occur if reaction time became less than 150% again. In addition an even more prolonged reaction time of greater than 200% from baseline would actually lead to a reduction in effect site concentration of propofol.
If the volunteer becomes unresponsive to verbal command or reaches the set maximum effect site concentration of 3 mcg/ml, or in the unlikely event the volunteer desaturates to a level below 90% or shows any other signs of respiratory depression, the infusion will be ended. The volunteer will be looked after by the anaesthetist (ensuring that the airway is maintained, supplemental oxygen is given and ventilation is adequate) until awake and responsive to speech and at this point they will be taken to the sedation suite recovery room.
Otherwise the sedation period will end after a 30 minute period or once the device has decreased the brain concentration of propofol on three successive occasions (due to reaction time slowing).
The volunteer will then be transferred to a recovery area, where they will be monitored until ready for discharge according to sedation suite criteria. Just prior to discharge volunteers will complete a short questionnaire to assess recall and satisfaction (see supplements).
As stated on volunteer information leaflet, volunteers can withdraw from the study at any time without giving a reason and without their care being in any way affected.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 50 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- ASA I or II (healthy or mild systemic illness) healthy volunteers
- Age 18 - 50
Key exclusion criteria (10 listed)
- ASA III or above
- Out with age group above
- Contraindication to propofol
- History of epilepsy
- History of substance abuse
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Propofol | Drug | – |
| Patient maintained sedation | Device | – |
Primary outcome
Minimal Sedation Level obtained (modified Objective Observer's Assessment of Sedation)
Maximal change in oxygen saturation (SpO2)
6 secondary outcomes
The maximal effect site concentration of propofol at which the minimal sedation level and maximal change in oxygen saturation were achieved
Relationship between reaction time, sedation level and effect site concentration of propofol
Requirement for supplementary oxygen (if SpO2 < 90%)
Requirement for airway or ventilatory support
Maximal change in heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR) and blood pressure (BP)
Volunteer satisfaction and recollection
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 7 Feb 2012.
Related trials for Healthy
Recruiting
THE EFFECTS OF GAME-BASED EXERCISE PROGRAMS
Physical Activity, Body Image
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
A Phase I Study of GLR2053 Tablets in Chinese Healthy Adult Participants
Atopic Dermatitis
Recruiting
Colon-delivered Riboflavin and Gut Microbiota Composition
Microbiome Dysbiosis, Gut Health
Not yet recruiting
Neuroergonomic Analysis of a Brain-Computer Interface Device (BCI)
Healthy Volunteers - Male and Female
RecruitingPhase 1
First-in-Human Trial to Assess REGN20423 in Healthy Adult Participants and Adult Participants With Atopic Dermatitis
Healthy Volunteer, Atopic Dermatitis
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Sonia Allam, MB ChB FRCA principal investigator
University of Glasgow Dept of Anaesthesia
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Propofol and Patient maintained sedation in people with Healthy, run by Sonia Allam at 1 site in United Kingdom.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 10 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 Feb 2012. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Minimal Sedation Level obtained (modified Objective Observer's Assessment of Sedation). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 7 Feb 2012.