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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |