Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 24, 2025
Application of an Amplitude-integrated EEG Monitor Cerebral Function Monitor to Neonates
Published on: September 6, 2017
Methods of Evaluating EEG Reactivity in Adult Intensive Care Units: A Review
Jaeho Hwang1, Sung-Min Cho2, Romergryko Geocadin2
1Division of Epilepsy, Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.
Purpose:
EEG reactivity (EEG-R) has become widely used in intensive care units for diagnosing and prognosticating patients with disorders of consciousness. Despite efforts toward standardization, including the establishment of terminology for critical care EEG in 2012, the processes of testing and interpreting EEG-R remain inconsistent.
Methods:
A review was conducted on PubMed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria consisted of articles published between January 2012, and November 2022, testing EEG-R on adult intensive care unit patients. Exclusion criteria included articles focused on highly specialized stimulation equipment or animal, basic science, or small case report studies. The Quality In Prognostic Studies tool was used to assess risk of bias.
Results:
One hundred and five articles were identified, with 26 variables collected for each. EEG-R testing varied greatly, including the number of stimuli (range: 1-8; 26 total described), stimulus length (range: 2-30 seconds), length between stimuli (range: 10 seconds-5 minutes), frequency of stimulus application (range: 1-9), frequency of EEG-R testing (range: 1-3 times daily), EEG electrodes (range: 4-64), personnel testing EEG-R (range: neurophysiologists to nonexperts), and sedation protocols (range: discontinuing all sedation to no attempt). EEG-R interpretation widely varied, including EEG-R definitions and grading scales, personnel interpreting EEG-R (range: EEG specialists to nonneurologists), use of quantitative methods, EEG filters, and time to detect EEG-R poststimulation (range: 1-30 seconds).
Conclusions:
This study demonstrates the persistent heterogeneity of testing and interpreting EEG-R over the past decade, and contributing components were identified. Further many institutional efforts must be made toward standardization, focusing on the reproducibility and unification of these methods, and detailed documentation in the published literature.
