Prospective cross-sectional study establishes sensory thresholds in healthy adults, suggesting important reference values for clinical use.
Background Diabetic peripheral neuropathy is a major complication of diabetes and a leading cause of foot ulcers and amputations. Vibrasense + T is a handheld quantitative sensory testing device that integrates vibration, warm and cold perception threshold testing into a single probe. Purpose This study aimed to establish normative reference values for Vibrasense + T device in a healthy adult Indian population. Methods In this prospective cross-sectional study, 345 healthy adults aged 18–93 years were recruited. Individuals with diabetes, neuropathy or other conditions affecting sensory function were excluded. Vibration perception threshold (VPT), warm perception threshold (WPT) and cold perception threshold (CPT) were assessed bilaterally at standard hand and foot sites using the method of limits. Normative reference values for VPT, WPT and CPT were derived using non-parametric percentile distributions, and the influence of age, sex and anthropometric variables on sensory thresholds was evaluated. Results All participants completed testing without adverse events. Sensory thresholds were consistently higher at the foot compared to the hand across all modalities ( p < .001). Age demonstrated a moderate association with VPT and a weaker but significant association with WPT, with thresholds increasing progressively across age groups (all p < .001). In contrast, CPT showed minimal and inconsistent age-related changes. Females exhibited greater sensitivity than males across most modalities. Side-to-side differences were small and not clinically meaningful. Height, weight and BMI did not meaningfully influence sensory thresholds. Conclusion This study establishes normative reference values for vibration, warm and cold perception thresholds using the Vibrasense + T device in an Indian population. These age- and sex-stratified values can assist interpretation of sensory thresholds measured with this device in clinical and research settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sharma et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: