Cargando…

Test‐retest and time dependent variation and diagnostic values of vibratory sensation determined by biothesiometer and the Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Polyneuropathy is a common neurological disorder with many potential causes. An essential part in screening, diagnosis, and follow‐up evaluation of polyneuropathy is testing of the sensory function including vibratory sensation. The graduated Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork and the bi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wittenberg, Bolette, Svendsen, Toke K., Gaist, Laura M., Itani, Mustapha, Gylfadottir, Sandra S., Jensen, Troels S., Gaist, David, Sindrup, Søren H., Krøigård, Thomas
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8413738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34087955
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2230
_version_ 1783747690593517568
author Wittenberg, Bolette
Svendsen, Toke K.
Gaist, Laura M.
Itani, Mustapha
Gylfadottir, Sandra S.
Jensen, Troels S.
Gaist, David
Sindrup, Søren H.
Krøigård, Thomas
author_facet Wittenberg, Bolette
Svendsen, Toke K.
Gaist, Laura M.
Itani, Mustapha
Gylfadottir, Sandra S.
Jensen, Troels S.
Gaist, David
Sindrup, Søren H.
Krøigård, Thomas
author_sort Wittenberg, Bolette
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Polyneuropathy is a common neurological disorder with many potential causes. An essential part in screening, diagnosis, and follow‐up evaluation of polyneuropathy is testing of the sensory function including vibratory sensation. The graduated Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork and the biothesiometer have been developed to quantify vibratory sensation through detection thresholds. The aim of this study is to compare the vibration detection thresholds determined by the two instruments regarding intraindividual temporal changes, interindividual variation in healthy subjects and comparison of the diagnostic value in patients with a clinical suspicion of polyneuropathy. METHODS: Ninety‐four healthy subjects, 98 patients with and 97 patients without a diagnosis of polyneuropathy were included. Quantitative sensory testing including biothesiometry, structured clinical examination, and nerve conduction studies were performed three times during 52 weeks in healthy subjects and once in patients. RESULTS: There were no significant changes over time for neither the Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork nor the biothesiometer, and both had larger between‐subject variation than within‐subject variation. Relative intertrial variability was largest for the biothesiometer. Diagnostic value (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) was moderate for both methods (Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork: 58%, 74%, 70%, 64%; biothesiometer: 47%, 77%, 68%, 59%). INTERPRETATION: The Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork and the biothesiometer have a low test‐retest and time dependent variation. They perform almost equally as diagnostic tools in patients with suspected polyneuropathy with a tendency toward better performance of the tuning fork.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8413738
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84137382021-09-07 Test‐retest and time dependent variation and diagnostic values of vibratory sensation determined by biothesiometer and the Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork Wittenberg, Bolette Svendsen, Toke K. Gaist, Laura M. Itani, Mustapha Gylfadottir, Sandra S. Jensen, Troels S. Gaist, David Sindrup, Søren H. Krøigård, Thomas Brain Behav Original Research BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Polyneuropathy is a common neurological disorder with many potential causes. An essential part in screening, diagnosis, and follow‐up evaluation of polyneuropathy is testing of the sensory function including vibratory sensation. The graduated Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork and the biothesiometer have been developed to quantify vibratory sensation through detection thresholds. The aim of this study is to compare the vibration detection thresholds determined by the two instruments regarding intraindividual temporal changes, interindividual variation in healthy subjects and comparison of the diagnostic value in patients with a clinical suspicion of polyneuropathy. METHODS: Ninety‐four healthy subjects, 98 patients with and 97 patients without a diagnosis of polyneuropathy were included. Quantitative sensory testing including biothesiometry, structured clinical examination, and nerve conduction studies were performed three times during 52 weeks in healthy subjects and once in patients. RESULTS: There were no significant changes over time for neither the Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork nor the biothesiometer, and both had larger between‐subject variation than within‐subject variation. Relative intertrial variability was largest for the biothesiometer. Diagnostic value (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) was moderate for both methods (Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork: 58%, 74%, 70%, 64%; biothesiometer: 47%, 77%, 68%, 59%). INTERPRETATION: The Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork and the biothesiometer have a low test‐retest and time dependent variation. They perform almost equally as diagnostic tools in patients with suspected polyneuropathy with a tendency toward better performance of the tuning fork. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-06-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8413738/ /pubmed/34087955 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2230 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Brain and Behavior published by Wiley Periodicals LLC https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Wittenberg, Bolette
Svendsen, Toke K.
Gaist, Laura M.
Itani, Mustapha
Gylfadottir, Sandra S.
Jensen, Troels S.
Gaist, David
Sindrup, Søren H.
Krøigård, Thomas
Test‐retest and time dependent variation and diagnostic values of vibratory sensation determined by biothesiometer and the Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork
title Test‐retest and time dependent variation and diagnostic values of vibratory sensation determined by biothesiometer and the Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork
title_full Test‐retest and time dependent variation and diagnostic values of vibratory sensation determined by biothesiometer and the Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork
title_fullStr Test‐retest and time dependent variation and diagnostic values of vibratory sensation determined by biothesiometer and the Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork
title_full_unstemmed Test‐retest and time dependent variation and diagnostic values of vibratory sensation determined by biothesiometer and the Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork
title_short Test‐retest and time dependent variation and diagnostic values of vibratory sensation determined by biothesiometer and the Rydel‐Seiffer tuning fork
title_sort test‐retest and time dependent variation and diagnostic values of vibratory sensation determined by biothesiometer and the rydel‐seiffer tuning fork
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8413738/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34087955
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/brb3.2230
work_keys_str_mv AT wittenbergbolette testretestandtimedependentvariationanddiagnosticvaluesofvibratorysensationdeterminedbybiothesiometerandtherydelseiffertuningfork
AT svendsentokek testretestandtimedependentvariationanddiagnosticvaluesofvibratorysensationdeterminedbybiothesiometerandtherydelseiffertuningfork
AT gaistlauram testretestandtimedependentvariationanddiagnosticvaluesofvibratorysensationdeterminedbybiothesiometerandtherydelseiffertuningfork
AT itanimustapha testretestandtimedependentvariationanddiagnosticvaluesofvibratorysensationdeterminedbybiothesiometerandtherydelseiffertuningfork
AT gylfadottirsandras testretestandtimedependentvariationanddiagnosticvaluesofvibratorysensationdeterminedbybiothesiometerandtherydelseiffertuningfork
AT jensentroelss testretestandtimedependentvariationanddiagnosticvaluesofvibratorysensationdeterminedbybiothesiometerandtherydelseiffertuningfork
AT gaistdavid testretestandtimedependentvariationanddiagnosticvaluesofvibratorysensationdeterminedbybiothesiometerandtherydelseiffertuningfork
AT sindrupsørenh testretestandtimedependentvariationanddiagnosticvaluesofvibratorysensationdeterminedbybiothesiometerandtherydelseiffertuningfork
AT krøigardthomas testretestandtimedependentvariationanddiagnosticvaluesofvibratorysensationdeterminedbybiothesiometerandtherydelseiffertuningfork