Dataset Information

Is it possible to substitute the monofilament test for the Ipswich Touch Test in screening for peripheral diabetic neuropathy?

ABSTRACT: Background:This study aimed to assess the agreement and efficacy of the Ipswich Touch Test compared to the monofilament test in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Materials and methods:A cross-sectional and analytical study was conducted. The inclusion criteria were patients with type II diabetes (n?=?250) who did not present ulcers or amputation in either foot. The exclusion criteria were as follows: patients who presented sequelae of cerebrovascular disease or other neurological pathologies, as well as diagnoses of malignancy, alcohol abuse, liver cirrhosis, hepatitis B, AIDS, hypothyroidism, chronic kidney disease or lupus erythaematosus, as these clinical conditions could influence or bias the results (Won and Park in Endocrinol Metab 31:230-238, 2016). Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, likelihood ratios, and Kappa index were calculated. Other factors assessed were glycated haemoglobin and body mass index. Results:Most of the participants were female (71.2%), and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) was greater than 7% in 54.4% of the patients. The mean age was 59.43 years, and the mean time since diagnosis was 12.38 years. The Kappa index was 0.819 (p?

SUBMITTER: Dutra LMA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7110690 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is it possible to substitute the monofilament test for the Ipswich Touch Test in screening for peripheral diabetic neuropathy?

Dutra Luz Marina Alfonso LMA Moura Mirian Conceição MC do Prado Flaviene Alves FA De Oliveira Lima Giselle G Melo Manuela Costa MC Fernandez Rubens Nelson Morato RNM Novaes Maria Rita Carvalho Garbi MRCG

Diabetology & metabolic syndrome 20200331

<h4>Background</h4>This study aimed to assess the agreement and efficacy of the Ipswich Touch Test compared to the monofilament test in individuals with type 2 diabetes.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>A cross-sectional and analytical study was conducted. The inclusion criteria were patients with type II diabetes (n = 250) who did not present ulcers or amputation in either foot. The exclusion criteria were as follows: patients who presented sequelae of cerebrovascular disease or other neurological ...[more]

PMID: 32266011

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveDiabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is one of the most important risk factors of diabetic foot ulcers, and early screening and treatment of DPN are crucial. The Ipswich Touch Test (IPTT) is a new method for screening for DPN and, compared with traditional methods, is more simple to operate and requires no equipment. However, the screening accuracy of IPTT in patients with DPN has not been well characterised. We aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to characterise the sensitivity and specificity of IPTT compared with traditional methods and to understand the potential screening value of IPTT.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database up to 16 April 2020.MethodsStata V.15.1 software was used for analysis, and the screening value of IPTT in DPN was described using 10 g monofilament (10g-MF), neuropathy disability scores (NDS), Pin prick, 128 Hz tuning fork, and ankle reflex as reference standards. Sensitivity, specificity and other measures of accuracy of IPTT for screening DPN were pooled based on a quality effects model. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (42020168420).ResultsOf the 441 records retrieved, 7 studies were evaluated for the screening value of IPTT. Five studies with 10g-MF as the reference standard were included in the meta-analysis, and the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.77 (95％CI 0.69-0.84) and 0.96(95％CI 0.93-0.98), respectively, and the area under curve was 0.897. Compared with vibration perception threshold, IPTT showed a sensitivity between 0.76 and 1, and a specificity between 0.90 and 0.97. Compared with NDS, IPTT showed a sensitivity between 0.53 and 1, and a specificity between 0.90 and 0.97. Compared with Pin prick, IPTT showed a sensitivity and specificity of 0.8 and 0.88, respectively. Compared with 128 Hz tuning fork, IPTT showed a sensitivity and specificity of 0.4 and 0.27, respectively. Compared with ankle reflex, IPTT had a sensitivity of 0.2 and a specificity of 0.97.ConclusionsIPTT shows a high degree of agreement with other commonly used screening tools for DPN screening. It can be used clinically, especially in remote areas and in primary medical institutions, and by self-monitoring patients. More high-quality studies are needed to assess and promote more effective screening practices.Prospero registration numberRegistration Number is CRD (42020168420).

Project description:Almost half of Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathies (DPNs) are symptom-free. Methods including questionnaires and electrodiagnosis (EDx) can be fruitful for easy reach to early diagnosis, correct treatments of diabetic neuropathy, and so decline of complications for instance diabetic foot ulcer and prevention of high costs. The goal of our study was to compare effectiveness of the Michigan neuropathy screening instrument (MNSI), United Kingdom screening test (UKST) and electrophysiological evaluation in confirming diabetic peripheral neuropathy.One hundred twenty five known diabetes mellitus male and female subjects older than 18 with or without symptoms of neuropathy comprised in this research. All of them were interviewed in terms of demographic data, lipid profile, HbA1C, duration of disease, and history of retinopathy, so examined by Michigan neuropathy screening instrument (MNSI), United Kingdom screening test (UKST), and nerve conduction studies (NCS). The collected data were analyzed by SPSS software 18.One hundred twenty five diabetic patients (70 female, 55 male) were recruited in this study with a mean age of 58.7 ± 10.2, and mean duration of diabetes was 10.17 ± 6.9 years. The mean neuropathy score of MNSI and UKST were 2.3 (1.7) and 4.16 (2.9), respectively. Each instrument detected the peripheral neuropathy in 78 (69 %) and 91 (73 %) of patients, respectively. There was a significant relationship between number of neuropathies and mean of diabetes duration and development of retinopathy in both questionnaire evaluations and NCS. By nerve conduction study, neuropathy was detected in 121 (97 %) diabetic patients were reported in order 15 (12 %) mononeuropathy (as 33 % sensory and 67 % motor neuropathy) and 106 (85 %) polyneuropathy (as 31 % motor and 69 % sensorimotor neuropathy).As regards NCS is an objective, simple, and non-invasive tool and also can determine level of damage and regeneration in peripheral nerves, this study suggests electrodiagnosis as a convenient option for screening, confirming, and follow up of diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

Project description:BackgroundDiabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is a common complication of diabetes mellitus and can lead to serious complications. Therapeutic strategies for pain control are available but there are few approaches that influence neurological deficits such as numbness.AimTo investigate the effectiveness of acupuncture on improving neurological deficits in patients suffering from type 2 DPN.MethodsThe acupuncture in DPN (ACUDPN) study was a two-armed, randomized, controlled, parallel group, open, multicenter clinical trial. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio into two groups: The acupuncture group received 12 acupuncture treatments over 8 wk, and the control group was on a waiting list during the first 16 wk, before it received the same treatment as the other group. Both groups received routine care. Outcome parameters were evaluated after 8, 16 and 24 wk and included neurological scores, such as an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) 11 for hypesthesia, neuropathic pain symptom inventory (NPSI), neuropathy deficit score (NDS), neuropathy symptom score (NSS); nerve conduction studies (NCS) were assessed with a handheld point-of-care device.ResultsSixty-two participants were included. The NRS for numbness showed a difference of 2.3 (P < 0.001) in favor of the acupuncture group, the effect persisted until week 16 with a difference of 2.2 (P < 0.001) between groups and 1.8 points at week 24 compared to baseline. The NPSI was improved in the acupuncture group by 12.6 points (P < 0.001) at week 8, the NSS score at week 8 with a difference of 1.3 (P < 0.001); the NDS and the TNSc score improved for the acupuncture group in week 8, with a difference of 2.0 points (P < 0.001) compared to the control group. Effects were persistent in week 16 with a difference of 1.8 points (P < 0.05). The NCS showed no meaningful changes. In both groups only minor side effects were reported.ConclusionStudy results suggest that acupuncture may be beneficial in type 2 diabetic DPN and seems to lead to a reduction in neurological deficits. No serious adverse events were recorded and the adherence to treatment was high. Confirmatory randomized sham-controlled clinical studies with adequate patient numbers are needed to confirm the results.

Dataset Information

Is it possible to substitute the monofilament test for the Ipswich Touch Test in screening for peripheral diabetic neuropathy?

Publications

Is it possible to substitute the monofilament test for the Ipswich Touch Test in screening for peripheral diabetic neuropathy?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets