Rhoades E R, Bryant R E
Chest. 1980 Feb;77(2):190-3. doi: 10.1378/chest.77.2.190.
Forty-three patients being evaluated for the presence of clinical tuberculosis received careful simultaneous cutaneous tests with intermediate-strength tuberculin, comparing reactions elicited with intradermal tests to those elicited by subcutaneous tests. In another study, reactions elicited by 0.1 ml of tuberculin were compared to those elicited by 0.05 ml of the same material in the other forearm. Analysis of scattergrams comparing sizes of reactions to each technique show that differences in the sizes of the reactions elicited by intradermal and subcutaneous tests are usually small and insignificant, but subcutaneous tests unexpectedly were found to often produce larger, rather than smaller, reactions. Likewise, differences in cutaneous reactions to 0.05 and 0.1 ml of tuberculin were not impressive. We conclude that the common impression that errors of technique in the application of cutaneous tests are common explanations for false-negative tests is unwarranted.
43名接受临床结核病评估的患者同时接受了中等强度结核菌素的仔细皮肤试验，比较了皮内试验和皮下试验引起的反应。在另一项研究中，将0.1ml结核菌素引起的反应与同一材料0.05ml在前臂另一侧引起的反应进行了比较。比较每种技术反应大小的散点图分析表明，皮内试验和皮下试验引起的反应大小差异通常很小且不显著，但意外发现皮下试验通常会产生更大而非更小的反应。同样，对0.05ml和0.1ml结核菌素的皮肤反应差异也不明显。我们得出结论，认为皮肤试验应用中的技术错误是假阴性试验常见原因的普遍看法是没有根据的。
