Correspondence  |   October 2017
The Isolated Forearm Paradox: Why Never a Response to Command in the Completely Unparalyzed?
Author Notes
  • Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and St. John’s College, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. jaideep.pandit@dpag.ox.ac.uk
  • This letter was sent to the authors of the original article referenced above, who declined to respond.—Evan D. Kharasch, M.D., Ph.D., Editor-in-Chief
    This letter was sent to the authors of the original article referenced above, who declined to respond.—Evan D. Kharasch, M.D., Ph.D., Editor-in-Chief×
  • (Accepted for publication June 28, 2017.)
    (Accepted for publication June 28, 2017.)×
Article Information
Correspondence
Correspondence   |   October 2017
The Isolated Forearm Paradox: Why Never a Response to Command in the Completely Unparalyzed?
Anesthesiology 10 2017, Vol.127, 722-723. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001799
Anesthesiology 10 2017, Vol.127, 722-723. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001799
Sanders et al.1  have carefully performed an international study by a distinguished consortium that I am sure was not easy to organize. That said, the fact that apparently suitably anesthetized patients move during isolated forearm test (IFT) after induction and tracheal intubation is well established and unsurprising. Long reported, with systematic review showing 31 previous papers with more than 1,300 patients studied,2  a positive response to IFT is easily reproducible by any anesthesiologist, anywhere, at any time. There is some modest interest in the now reported response rate (~5%)1  being lower than the aggregate of these previous studies (~40%),2  but it is difficult to see what else is novel about this latest report.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large