How stable are quantitative sensory testing measurements over time? : report on 10-week reliability and agreement of results in healthy volunteers

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Deutscher übersetzter Titel:Wie stabil sind die Messungen quantitativer sensorischer Tests im Laufe der Zeit? : Bericht über die 10-Wochen-Zuverlässigkeit und Übereinstimmung der Ergebnisse bei gesunden Freiwilligen
Autor:Nothnagel, Helen; Puta, Christian; Lehmann, Thomas; Baumbach, Philipp; Menard, Martha Brown; Gabriel, Brunhild; Gabriel, Holger Horst Werner; Weiss, Thomas; Musial, Frauke
Erschienen in:Journal of pain research
Veröffentlicht:10 (2017), S. 2067-2078, Lit.
Format: Literatur (SPOLIT)
Publikationstyp: Zeitschriftenartikel
Medienart: Elektronische Ressource (online) Gedruckte Ressource
Sprache:Englisch
ISSN:1178-7090
DOI:10.2147/JPR.S137391
Schlagworte:
Online Zugang:
Erfassungsnummer:PU202005003620
Quelle:BISp

Abstract des Autors

Background: Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is a diagnostic tool for the assessment of the somatosensory system. To establish QST as an outcome measure for clinical trials, the question of how similar the measurements are over time is crucial. Therefore, long-term reliability and limits of agreement of the standardized QST protocol of the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain were tested.
Methods: QST on the lower back and hand dorsum (dominant hand) were assessed twice in 22 healthy volunteers (10 males and 12 females; mean age: 46.6±13.0 years), with sessions separated by 10.0±2.9 weeks. All measurements were performed by one investigator. To investigate longterm reliability and agreement of QST, differences between the two measurements, correlation coefficients, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), Bland–Altman plots (limits of agreement), and standard error of measurement were used.
Results: Most parameters of the QST were reliable over 10 weeks in healthy volunteers: Almost-perfect ICCs were observed for heat pain threshold (hand) and mechanical pain sen-sitivity (back). Substantial ICCs were observed for heat pain threshold (back), pressure pain threshold (back), mechanical pain sensitivity (hand), and vibration detection threshold (back and hand). Some QST parameters, such as cold detection threshold, exhibited low ICCs, but also very low variability. Generally, QST measures exhibited narrow limits of agreement in the Bland–Altman plots.
Conclusion: The standardized QST protocol of the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain is feasible to be used in treatment trials. Moreover, defining a statistically meaningful change is possible, which is a prerequisite for the use of QST in clinical trials as well as in long-term investigations of disease progression.