Skip Navigation

British Journal of Anaesthesia 2006 96(6):801; doi:10.1093/bja/ael086
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2006. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The Narcotrend ‘depth of anaesthesia’ monitor cannot reliably detect consciousness during general anaesthesia: an investigation using the isolated forearm technique

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

Editor—In the discussion of his paper comparing the Narcotrend monitor to the isolated forearm technique (IFT), Russell1 states that ‘to be clinically useful, not only must an anaesthesia brain monitor be 100% accurate but it must also be reliable’. This is an expectation of depth of anaesthesia monitoring that I often hear expressed by colleagues, despite the general lack of 100% accuracy in predictive tests used in clinical practice. Certainly neither the . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?