Norrsell U, Eliasson B, Frizell M, Wallin B G, Wesslau C, Olausson H
Department of Physiology, P.O. Box 432, Göteborg University, SE-40530 Göteborg, Sweden.
Muscle Nerve. 2001 Nov;24(11):1496-502. doi: 10.1002/mus.1174.
Five different procedures used to diagnose neuropathy were compared in a "blind" study with diabetic patients. The aim was to evaluate tests of tactile directional sensibility. Three matched groups were examined, two groups with type I diabetes, either with or without suspected neuropathy, and one of healthy controls. Testing consisted of: (1) examination by a specialist in neurology, (2) electrophysiologic measurement of nerve conduction velocity and determination of cool sensitivity, and (3) determination of directional sensibility in two stages, with categorical and quantitative techniques. Abnormal test results were obtained for both groups of diabetic patients. Quantitatively measured directional sensibility had the highest sensitivity (89%) and specificity (85%) when calculated for patients who had received a diagnosis of neuropathy from the neurologist, despite one case of abnormal directional sensibility among the healthy controls. Conduction velocity testing was almost comparably sensitive (80%) and cool sensitivity, comparably specific (85%) when calculated in the same manner.
在一项针对糖尿病患者的“盲法”研究中，对用于诊断神经病变的五种不同程序进行了比较。目的是评估触觉方向感测试。检查了三个匹配组，两组为I型糖尿病患者，一组有疑似神经病变，另一组没有，还有一组是健康对照组。测试包括：（1）由神经科专家进行检查，（2）神经传导速度的电生理测量和冷觉敏感性的测定，以及（3）分两个阶段测定方向感，采用分类和定量技术。两组糖尿病患者均获得了异常测试结果。对于经神经科医生诊断为神经病变的患者，定量测量的方向感具有最高的敏感性（89%）和特异性（85%），尽管健康对照组中有一例方向感异常。以同样方式计算时，传导速度测试的敏感性几乎相当（80%），冷觉敏感性的特异性相当（85%）。
