ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07763548PROTECTUpdated Oct 23, 2026

A Novel Two-Step Dosing Induction Strategy (The Propofol Challenge Test) to Minimize Propofol Injection Pain

A Phase 4 interventional study of Bolus injection and Fractionned onjection in Any Patient Under General Anesthesia With Propofol Induction, sponsored by Erasme University Hospital. Recruiting at 1 site in Belgium. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-23.

Sponsored by Erasme University Hospital · Phase 4, Interventional, and Treatment

Updated Oct 23, 2026Now RecruitingFirst site in Belgium+2 moreGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
2,000
Allocation
Non-randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Propofol is the most widely used intravenous hypnotic agent for the induction of general anesthesia owing to its rapid onset and short duration of action. Despite its favorable pharmacokinetics and widespread use, a notable drawback persists: the incidence of pain on injection. Statistics on the matter are widely variable, but some estimates indicate that the incidence of pain with propofol injection is around 70%1.

To date, no studies have systematically evaluated whether dividing the induction dose of propofol-starting with a small sub-induction bolus (e.g., 20 mg) followed by the remainder-can reduce pain perception.

We hypothesize that a two-step administration of propofol-consisting of a small initial dose followed by the remaining dose-may serve as a nociceptive preconditioning stimulus and reduce postoperative patient-recalled injection pain compared to standard single-bolus administration.

Read the detailed description

Background and Rationale Propofol is the most widely used intravenous hypnotic agent for the induction of general anesthesia owing to its rapid onset and short duration of action. Despite its favorable pharmacokinetics and widespread use, a notable drawback persists: the incidence of pain on injection. Statistics on the matter are widely variable, but some estimates indicate that the incidence of pain with propofol injection is around 70%1.

The mechanism behind propofol-induced injection pain is multifactorial. Propofol, an alkylphenol, directly irritates the venous endothelium upon contact. In addition, it activates the kallikrein-kinin system, leading to the release of bradykinin and other proinflammatory mediators, which increase vascular permeability and sensitize peripheral nociceptors. While various methods-such as pretreatment with lidocaine-have shown efficacy in reducing this discomfort, a substantial proportion of patients still report moderate to severe pain during administration.

To date, no studies have systematically evaluated whether dividing the induction dose of propofol-starting with a small sub-induction bolus (e.g., 20 mg) followed by the remainder-can reduce pain perception. The rationale for this approach draws on a parallel from thermos-sensory experience: gradual immersion in cold water is often less painful than immediate full-body exposure. Anecdotal and physiological evidence suggests that incremental exposure to a noxious stimulus allows for short-term adaptive responses, reducing the subjective intensity of the experience. On a mechanistic level, this effect may involve both peripheral and central nervous system plasticity. A small initial dose of propofol may serve as a moderate nociceptive stimulus that activates endogenous inhibitory pathways-such as descending modulation from the periaqueductal gray and rostroventral medulla-which dampen the transmission of subsequent pain signals. This phenomenon, known as homotopic or heterotopic noxious conditioning stimulation (HNCS) or preconditioning-induced hypoalgesia, relies on dynamic modulation of nociceptive input at spinal and supraspinal levels.

We hypothesize that a two-step administration of propofol-consisting of a small initial dose followed by the remaining dose-may serve as a nociceptive preconditioning stimulus and reduce postoperative patient-recalled injection pain compared to standard single-bolus administration.

Sample size:

The sample size was calculated to detect a clinically meaningful difference in the incidence of injection pain between the two groups in the proposed PROTECT trial. We plan to conduct an interim analysis at the midpoint of data collection (around 4 months) to assess conditional power based on the observed effect size. At that point, we will simulate 1,000 completed trials using the interim data to estimate conditional power. If conditional power is \<10%, we would consider stopping the study early for futility. Conversely, if we observe strong early evidence of efficacy, we may stop early using a conservative O'Brien-Fleming boundary (interim p \< 0.005, final p \< 0.048). Assuming an incidence of pain of 10% in the control group and 5% in the intervention group (absolute difference of 5%) and using a two-sided chi-square test to compare independent proportions with alpha = 0.048 (adjusted for the interim look), we estimate that 880 participants (440 per group) would be required to detect this difference with 80% power. We propose enrolling 1,000 patients to allow for potential dropout.

02

Conditions studied

  • Any Patient Under General Anesthesia With Propofol Induction

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Propofol, pain,
03

In context

Pain

10,054 studies on the registry are indexed under Pain; 1,649 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 2,000 is above the median of 66 across 8,493 interventional studies indexed under Pain.

Browse Pain studies →

Lead sponsor

Erasme University Hospital is the lead sponsor of 181 studies on the registry; 35 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Adults ≥18 years old.
  • Undergoing non cardiac surgery under general anesthesia.
  • Receiving propofol for induction.
  • No midazolam premedication
  • 20g IV Catheter below the antecubital fossa used for induction of anesthesia

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Emergency surgery.
  • Inability to communicate (language or cognitive impairment).
  • Pre-induction IV analgesia administration or patients under preoperatively
  • Patient with dementia, Alzheimer or other uncontrolled psychiatric diseases that would impact their ability to willingly participate
05

Study design

Phase
Phase 4
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Non-randomized
Intervention model
Sequential assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
2,000 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Single bolus injection

    Patient will receive their propofol induction dose in a single bolus injection.

    Other: Bolus injection

  • Experimental
    Fractionned injection

    Patients will receive 20 mg of propofol followed by the remaining dose of propofol 30-40 seconds later.

    Other: Fractionned onjection

Interventions

  • OtherBolus injection

    During Months 1, 3, 5 and 7 patients will receive a full single bolus of propofol

  • OtherFractionned onjection

    During Months 2, 4, 6 and 8 patients will receive the same total dose but delivered in two sequential injections: an initial subdose (e.g., 20 mg), followed by the remainder of the dose after a brief interval (e.g., 30 seconds).

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Pain on injection

    To compare the incidence of postoperative patient-recalled injection pain compared to standard single-bolus administration.

    Time frame: 6 hour

Secondary outcomes

  1. Intensity of pain

    The intensity of remembered pain (Visual analog scale 0-10)

    Time frame: 6 hours

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Euasobhon P, Dej-Arkom S, Siriussawakul A, Muangman S, Sriraj W, Pattanittum P, Lumbiganon P. Lidocaine for reducing propofol-induced pain on induction of anaesthesia in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Feb 18;2(2):CD007874. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007874.pub2. PubMed 26888026 ↗
  • Picard P, Tramer MR. Prevention of pain on injection with propofol: a quantitative systematic review. Anesth Analg. 2000 Apr;90(4):963-9. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200004000-00035. PubMed 10735808 ↗
  • Nakane M, Iwama H. A potential mechanism of propofol-induced pain on injection based on studies using nafamostat mesilate. Br J Anaesth. 1999 Sep;83(3):397-404. doi: 10.1093/bja/83.3.397. PubMed 10655909 ↗
  • Jalota L, Kalira V, George E, Shi YY, Hornuss C, Radke O, Pace NL, Apfel CC; Perioperative Clinical Research Core. Prevention of pain on injection of propofol: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2011 Mar 15;342:d1110. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d1110. PubMed 21406529 ↗
  • Bellouni G, Clanet M, Touihri K, Delaporte A, Boulos NM, Kim K, Grogan T, Alexander B, Coeckelenbergh S, Joosten A. Incidence and predictors of postoperative recall of propofol injection pain: a prospective observational cohort pilot study. BJA Open. 2026 Feb 27;17:100537. doi: 10.1016/j.bjao.2026.100537. eCollection 2026 Mar. PubMed 41798321 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Timeline

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Oct 2026 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for May 2028, 19 months after the start.

Of 280 non-industry phase 4 interventional studies under Pain, half reached primary completion within 18 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 10 and three quarters within 35. This study's planned 19 months is close to that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 295 studies reached it within 18 months; a quarter within 8 and three quarters within 33.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Aug 10, 2026
First posted
Aug 13, 2026
StartActual
Oct 20, 2026
Primary completionEst.
May 31, 2028
CompletionEst.
Jun 30, 2028
Last update
Oct 23, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
Status
Not yet recruiting→Recruiting
changed Oct 23, 2026
Sites
1 site added — first site in Belgium
Show site
  • Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles - Hôpital erasme · Brussels, Belgium
Oct 23, 2026
Start date
Oct 2, 2026→Oct 20, 2026 (actual)
Oct 23, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Oct 23, 2026
    Not yet recruiting→Recruiting
    1 site added — first site in Belgium
    Show site
    • Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles - Hôpital erasme · Brussels, Belgium
    Start date Oct 2, 2026→Oct 20, 2026 (now actual)
    + 1 other change: verification date

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07763548
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Aug 13, 2026
Start date
Oct 20, 2026
Primary completion
May 31, 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Jun 30, 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 23, 2026

Study contacts

Denis Schmartz, MD
Contact
denis.schmartz@hubruxelles.be
+3225553324
Alexandre Joosten, MD, PhD
study director · Department of Anesthesiology & Perioperative Medecine, Ronald Reagan Medical Center, University of California Los Angeles, USA

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion