Lundström Ronnie, Nilsson Tohr, Hagberg Mats, Burström Lage
Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2008 Apr;81(5):553-7. doi: 10.1007/s00420-007-0249-1. Epub 2007 Sep 25.
The objective of the study was to apply, on a group of vibration exposed individuals, a proposed modification of the Stockholm Workshop scale for grading of sensorineural disorders by using self-reports and data from objective testing and to compare grading obtained through the two approaches.
The study group consisted of 126 young persons with different individual levels of hand-transmitted vibration exposures. Effect measurements included a self-administered questionnaire and vibrotactile perception measurements and Purdue Pegboard testing. For grading using self reports three specific questions, believed to be good markers for complaints of intermittent numbness, sensory deficiency, and reduced performance in fine motor tasks, was picked out from the questionnaire. Results from vibrotactile perception and Purdue Pegboard testing were used for grading based on quantitative sensory testing. The sensorineural grading obtained by the two methods was then compared.
The outcome showed that about 60% of all individuals within the study group are graded equally by the two methods for grading. The frequency of individuals graded at advanced SN stages were however higher when using QST, predominantly due to more positive cases for the Purdue pegboard test compared with the corresponding outcome from the self reports.
The proposed modification of the grading scale reduces the in-built progressiveness and allows different combinations of sensorineural symptoms. The two grading methods seem to be somewhat correlated, something which may be considered as encouraging and promising for those who prefer to use, or must use one of the methods for grading. The proposed model for grading using self-reports should, however, be considered more as a conceptual idea for how this may be done. The models should be applied on a larger, more vibration exposed and more symptomatic study group, compared with the present study group, before any far-reaching conclusions can be drawn.
本研究的目的是对一组接触振动的个体应用一种提议的斯德哥尔摩研讨会量表修改版,通过自我报告和客观测试数据对感觉神经性障碍进行分级,并比较通过两种方法获得的分级结果。
研究组由126名手部接触振动水平不同的年轻人组成。效应测量包括一份自我管理的问卷、振动触觉感知测量和普渡钉板测试。为了使用自我报告进行分级,从问卷中挑选出三个特定问题,这些问题被认为是间歇性麻木、感觉缺陷和精细运动任务表现下降投诉的良好指标。振动触觉感知和普渡钉板测试的结果用于基于定量感觉测试的分级。然后比较两种方法获得的感觉神经分级。
结果表明,研究组中约60%的个体通过两种分级方法得到的分级相同。然而,使用定量感觉测试时,处于感觉神经高级阶段分级的个体频率更高,主要是因为与自我报告的相应结果相比,普渡钉板测试有更多阳性病例。
提议的分级量表修改版减少了内在的进展性,并允许感觉神经症状的不同组合。两种分级方法似乎有一定的相关性,对于那些更喜欢使用或必须使用其中一种分级方法的人来说,这可能被认为是令人鼓舞和有前景的。然而,提议的使用自我报告的分级模型应更多地被视为一种关于如何进行分级的概念性想法。在得出任何深远结论之前,与当前研究组相比,该模型应应用于更大、接触振动更多且症状更明显的研究组。