Stanford University
Stanford, California, 94305, United States
NCT Number: NCT07198711
This open-label, randomized crossover study in healthy adults tests two propofol protocols to produce distinct experiential states. One induces brief loss of responsiveness with spontaneous emergence, intended to elicit dream reports; the other maintains light sedation without loss of responsiveness, intended to elicit non-dream experiences while participants remain responsive. The main goals are to (a) measure the protocol-concordant experiential report rate (how often each method produces its intended experience), (b) explore EEG correlates of these experiences in the two states, and (c) describe their phenomenology (what they are like). We will also examine short-term changes in well-being and sleep related to these experiences. Participants complete four sessions (two of each method) with EEG and routine monitoring, immediate post-session interviews, and brief questionnaires and daily sleep/dream logs before and after anesthesia sessions.
Interested in participating?
Request Info18 year–70 year
All sexes
Interventional
Phase 1
Stanford, California, 94305, United States
Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Intravenous propofol infusion that meets the criteria: (1) maintenance of spontaneous ventilation, (2) sedation level corresponding to a Patient State Index (PSI) no lower than 25; and (3) loss of responsiveness (LOR) defined by the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) = -5 [unarousable]. Anesthesia is then maintained at that level for 30 minutes, followed by spontaneous emergence.
Intravenous propofol infusion titrated stepwise to reach a state where participants are sedated but have behavioral responsiveness. Sedation is maintained at this level for 30 minutes.
Time frame: Assessed within 5 minutes of return of responsiveness (LOR protocol) or within 5 minutes of session end (light-sedation protocol).
Presence vs absence of an experiential report elicited via a structured interview (modified Brice). "Protocol-concordant" is defined as:
LOR protocol-success = any dream report upon emergence; Light-sedation (no-LOR) protocol-success = any experiential report that is not a dream (e.g., imagery, sounds, thoughts, bodily sensations, hypnagogic-like experiences) while the participant remained behaviorally responsive.
Time frame: Matched-duration EEG windows during the 30-minute maintenance period: pre-emergence window prior to return of responsiveness in the LOR protocol, and a time-matched window during maintenance in the no-LOR protocol.
EEG correlates of the two protocols/states, examining spectral band powers, band ratios, and other features during the matched windows and their association with protocol-concordant experiential outcomes.
Time frame: Interview immediately post-session
Transcriptions of audio-interviews and analysis of these using (i) codebook-based content analysis, (ii) phenomenological thematic/structural coding, and (iii) NLP-derived text features.
Time frame: Interview immediately post-session
Participants' own ratings of their anesthesia experiences: complexity, vividness, affect (valence/intensity), meaningfulness, dynamism/movement, bizarreness, perceived duration, the degree of mystical experiences (Mystical Experience Questionnaire; Barrett et al., 2015) and challenging experiences (Challenging Experience Questionnaire; Strickland et al., 2024).
Time frame: Interview immediately post-session
Comparison of phenomenology between anesthesia dreams (LOR protocol) and dream-like experiences (light sedation no-LOR protocol) based on the analysis of narrative reports and self-ratings of the experiences
Time frame: Home dream logs (2 weeks pre-session and 2 weeks post-session) vs anesthesia interview (immediate post-session).
Differences in phenomenology of home dreams vs anesthesia dreams based on the analysis of narrative reports and self-ratings of these experiences
Time frame: From pre-anesthesia baseline to post-anesthesia discharge
Incidence of adverse events during anesthesia or recovery (e.g., PONV; hypoxemia; hypotension; airway intervention) and any serious adverse events per FDA criteria.
Time frame: Baseline (2-week pre-session average) to follow-up (2-week post-session average)
As measured with the following mood scales: PANAS (Watson et al., 1988) and items from the 12-point Affect Circumplex (Yik et al., 2011)
Time frame: Baseline (2-weeks pre-anesthesia) to follow-up (2-weeks post-anesthesia)
As measured with The Satisfaction With Life Scale (Diener et al., 1985)
Time frame: Baseline (2-weeks pre-anesthesia) to follow-up (2-weeks post-anesthesia)
As measured with The Peace of Mind Scale (Lee et al., 2013)
Time frame: Baseline (2-week pre-session) to follow-up (2-week post-session)
Change in sleep quality as measured using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Inventory (PSQI; Buysse et al., 1989) and daily sleep and dream diaries
Time frame: Baseline (2-week pre-session) to follow-up (2-week post-session).
Change in dream recall frequency, occurrence of nightmares, nightmare distress as measured using the Mannheim Dream Questionnaire (MADRE; Schredl et al., 2014) and daily dream diaries
Time frame: Baseline (2-weeks pre-anesthesia) to follow-up (2-weeks post-anesthesia)
As measured with the Harmony in Life Scale (Kjell et al., 2016)
Time frame: Baseline (2-weeks pre-anesthesia) to follow-up (2-weeks post-anesthesia)
As measured with the Psychological Well-Being Scale (Ryff, 1989)
Time frame: Baseline (2-weeks pre-anesthesia) to follow-up (2-weeks post-anesthesia)
As measured with the Perth Alexithymia Questionnaire Short Form (Preece et al., 2023)
Time frame: Baseline (2-weeks pre-anesthesia) to follow-up (2-weeks post-anesthesia)
As measured with the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (Gross & John, 2003) and the Perth Emotion Regulation Competency Index (Preece et al., 2018)
Time frame: Baseline (2-weeks pre-anesthesia) to follow-up (2-weeks post-anesthesia)
As measured with the depression module of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ9; Spitzer et al., 1999)
Time frame: Baseline (2-weeks pre-anesthesia) to follow-up (2-weeks post-anesthesia)
As measured with the The Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-9; Spitzer et al., 2006)
Time frame: Baseline (2-weeks pre-anesthesia) to follow-up (2-weeks post-anesthesia)
As measured the 3-item UCLA Loneliness Scale (Hughes et al., 2004)
Stanford University
Other
Comparison of Ketamine Versus Saline During Sedation in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: a Double-blind Trial
Acronym: IDEA
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT00071045
Healthy Volunteers, Hematologic Diseases
Bethesda, Maryland, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT07662954
Behavior, Echocardiography
Karaman, Turkey (Türkiye)
View Trial DetailsNCT07634133
Healthy Volunteers
Katowice, Poland
View Trial DetailsNCT07031882
Healthy Volunteers
College Station, Texas, United States
View Trial Details