A small study compared EEG measures with later recall reports. Drug-related differences in an established index highlighted limits of applying one number across sedatives.
Twenty-six sedated patients were studied alongside awake and general-anesthesia controls. Twelve sedated participants reported recall. Both the proposed posterior–anterior index and BIS distinguished recall groups in the analyzed data.
BIS appeared sensitive to whether midazolam or propofol was used and correlated with muscle activity; the proposed index did not show those same patterns.
Groups differed in age and sex distribution, recordings had technical limitations, and the sample was small. Recall under sedation also differs from unintended awareness during planned general anesthesia.
The study cannot establish that a threshold guarantees amnesia or unconsciousness. It supports further evaluation of monitoring methods. Forensic interpretation should retain sedation goals, actual drug, signal quality, muscle effects, and the timing and wording of recall assessment.
Original analysis of the supplied journal article, identified as PMC6883081.