Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT02912039
NCT02912039
Completed
N/A

Electromyographic Assessment of the TetraGraph in Normal Volunteers

Mayo Clinic1 site in 1 country45 target enrollmentSeptember 2016

Overview

Phase
N/A
Intervention
Not specified
Conditions
Neuromuscular Blockade
Sponsor
Mayo Clinic
Enrollment
45
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Comparison of train of four measurements between TOF Watch and TetraGraph
Status
Completed
Last Updated
2 years ago

Overview

Brief Summary

There is an urgent need for an easy-to-use and accurate quantitative neuromuscular monitor in the clinical setting. The aim of this clinical investigation is to examine a prototype of a quantitative monitoring instrument that will meet most, if not all, of the clinical requirements.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
September 2016
End Date
March 2018
Last Updated
2 years ago
Study Type
Observational
Sex
All

Investigators

Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

J. Ross Renew, M.D.

Principal Investigator

Mayo Clinic

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • Not provided

Exclusion Criteria

  • Not provided

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Comparison of train of four measurements between TOF Watch and TetraGraph

Time Frame: During stimulation

The primary endpoint will be an analysis of the agreement between the TOF-Watch (the current gold standard) and TetraGraphTM devices during neuromuscular monitoring. Data Acceleromyography (AMG) and Electromyography (EMG) will be compared between the two devices during testing of single twitch (ST) and train of four (TOF) patterns at varying current amplitudes, from threshold amplitude (the lowest current amplitude that is able to generate a muscle response), to supramaximal current amplitude (the amplitude that elicits maximal muscle response). Bias and limits of agreement will be calculated for each stimulation pattern (ST and TOF) at currents between submaximal and supramaximal amplitude. Measured responses obtained with the two technologies (AMG and EMG) will be compared.

Secondary Outcomes

  • EMG amplitude(During stimulation)
  • Discomfort level(During stimulation)
  • Noise level(During stimulation)
  • Stimulus artifact(During stimulation)
  • Maximal EMG amplitude(During stimulation)
  • Appearance EMG response(During stimulation)
  • Consistency in amplitude(During stimulation)

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials