PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
July 30, 2002Diabetic Medicine53 citations

Comparison of vibration perception thresholds obtained with the Neurothesiometer and the CASE IV and relationship to nerve conduction studies

View Full Paper
VBVera BrilBPBruce A. Perkins

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

AIMS: Vibration perception thresholds (VPTs) are used frequently to assess somatosensory pathways in clinical trials. Different equipment, testing paradigms, and stimulation sites produce varying results which make comparisons between trials and patient populations challenging. Information comparing the VPT obtained with the Neurothesiometer with that with the Vibratron is available, but not for a similar comparison with the CASE IV (computer-assisted sensory examination device). METHODS: Subjects (n = 478) including reference, non-neuropathic subjects with diabetes mellitus (DM), and diabetic patients with mild, moderate and severe diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSP) had VPTs measured with the CASE IV and Neurothesiometer, as well as standard sural nerve conduction studies (NCS), all performed during the same half-day. The dorsum of the foot was used as the site of stimulation for the CASE IV VPT determination and the distal phalanx of the first toe for the Neurothesiometer. RESULTS: VPTs by the CASE IV and the Neurothesiometer compared moderately by linear regression analyses (R2 = 0.547, P < 0.0001), and by 95% confidence intervals. Sensitivity for the diagnosis of mild DSP was 70% with the Neurothesiometer and 49% with the CASE IV. VPTs determined by either the Neurothesiometer or the CASE IV correlated with similar agreement to the sural nerve action potential amplitude as determined by nerve conduction studies (NCS) (R2 = 0.456 and 0.461, respectively, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated a significant correlation of VPT values in different stages of DSP obtained by the two methods. The Neurothesiometer was more sensitive for the diagnosis of DSP, particularly in those with mild neuropathy. Similar correlations between VPTs and electrophysiological parameters were observed, indicating that both methods are valid, and thus the Neurothesiometer may be preferable due to the ease and rapidity of testing by this method.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Bril et al. (2002) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a8842e5c0c64b7dddeb41edhttps://doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-5491.2002.00759.x
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Measuring Diabetic Neuropathy: Assessment and Comparison of Clinical Examination and Quantitative Sensory Testing1989 · 123 citations
  2. 2A multicentre study of the prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy in the United Kingdom hospital clinic population1993 · 1,517 citations
  3. 3A comparison of the neurothesiometer and biothesiometer for measuring vibration perception in diabetic patients1993 · 40 citations
  4. 4Thermal sensitivity tester. Device for quantitative assessment of thermal sense in diabetic neuropathy1986 · 29 citations
  5. 5Clinical Trials in Neurology2001 · 34 citations