新型热检测和热痛阈值神经测试装置的重测信度和并发效度。

Monika Zillinger, Leonard Joseph, Lieselotte Corten
{"title":"新型热检测和热痛阈值神经测试装置的重测信度和并发效度。","authors":"Monika Zillinger,&nbsp;Leonard Joseph,&nbsp;Lieselotte Corten","doi":"10.1080/03091902.2022.2118382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Thermal threshold testing is important for evaluating the thermal function of small-fibre nerve types C and A-delta. This study investigated the reliability and validity of a novel nerve testing device (NNTD) in evaluating thermal detection and thermal pain thresholds. Test-retest reliability of the NNTD and its concurrent validity compared to the current technology (Medoc TSA-2, Advanced Thermosensory Stimulator, Israel) were investigated among 10 healthy participants. Each participant was tested for the warm detection threshold (WDT), cold detection threshold (CDT), hot pain threshold (HPT) and cold pain threshold (CPT) on the medial forearm with NNTD for two trials and the Medoc TSA-2 for one trial over two consecutive days. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient values, Standard Error of Measurement and Bland Altman plots were calculated for test-retest reliability. One-way ANOVA and Bland Altman plots were calculated for validity. The test-retest reliability of the NNTD was good for CPT (ICC = 0.88), moderate for WDT (ICC = 0.545) and HPT (ICC = 0.710). The NNTD was valid for both trials of HPT and CPT and one trial for WDT compared to the Medoc TSA-2. In conclusion, the NNTD showed good to moderate reliability and was found to be valid compared to the Medoc TSA-2.</p>","PeriodicalId":39637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Test-Retest reliability and concurrent validity of novel nerve testing device for thermal detection and thermal pain thresholds.\",\"authors\":\"Monika Zillinger,&nbsp;Leonard Joseph,&nbsp;Lieselotte Corten\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03091902.2022.2118382\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Thermal threshold testing is important for evaluating the thermal function of small-fibre nerve types C and A-delta. This study investigated the reliability and validity of a novel nerve testing device (NNTD) in evaluating thermal detection and thermal pain thresholds. Test-retest reliability of the NNTD and its concurrent validity compared to the current technology (Medoc TSA-2, Advanced Thermosensory Stimulator, Israel) were investigated among 10 healthy participants. Each participant was tested for the warm detection threshold (WDT), cold detection threshold (CDT), hot pain threshold (HPT) and cold pain threshold (CPT) on the medial forearm with NNTD for two trials and the Medoc TSA-2 for one trial over two consecutive days. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient values, Standard Error of Measurement and Bland Altman plots were calculated for test-retest reliability. One-way ANOVA and Bland Altman plots were calculated for validity. The test-retest reliability of the NNTD was good for CPT (ICC = 0.88), moderate for WDT (ICC = 0.545) and HPT (ICC = 0.710). The NNTD was valid for both trials of HPT and CPT and one trial for WDT compared to the Medoc TSA-2. In conclusion, the NNTD showed good to moderate reliability and was found to be valid compared to the Medoc TSA-2.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":39637,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03091902.2022.2118382\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Engineering\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03091902.2022.2118382","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Engineering","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

热阈值测试是评价C型和a型δ小纤维神经热功能的重要手段。本研究探讨了一种新型神经测试装置(NNTD)在评估热检测和热痛阈值方面的信度和效度。在10名健康受试者中调查了NNTD的重测信度及其与当前技术(Medoc TSA-2, Advanced Thermosensory Stimulator, Israel)的并发效度。在连续两天的时间内,对每位受试者分别进行两组NNTD前臂内侧的热检测阈值(WDT)、冷检测阈值(CDT)、热痛阈值(HPT)和冷痛阈值(CPT)测试,其中一组为Medoc TSA-2测试。计算类内相关系数值、测量标准误差和Bland Altman图来计算重测信度。采用单因素方差分析和Bland Altman图计算效度。NNTD对CPT的重测信度较好(ICC = 0.88),对WDT (ICC = 0.545)和HPT (ICC = 0.710)的重测信度中等。与Medoc TSA-2相比,NNTD对HPT和CPT的两项试验都有效,对WDT的一项试验也有效。综上所述,NNTD具有良好到中等的信度,与Medoc TSA-2相比是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Test-Retest reliability and concurrent validity of novel nerve testing device for thermal detection and thermal pain thresholds.

Thermal threshold testing is important for evaluating the thermal function of small-fibre nerve types C and A-delta. This study investigated the reliability and validity of a novel nerve testing device (NNTD) in evaluating thermal detection and thermal pain thresholds. Test-retest reliability of the NNTD and its concurrent validity compared to the current technology (Medoc TSA-2, Advanced Thermosensory Stimulator, Israel) were investigated among 10 healthy participants. Each participant was tested for the warm detection threshold (WDT), cold detection threshold (CDT), hot pain threshold (HPT) and cold pain threshold (CPT) on the medial forearm with NNTD for two trials and the Medoc TSA-2 for one trial over two consecutive days. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient values, Standard Error of Measurement and Bland Altman plots were calculated for test-retest reliability. One-way ANOVA and Bland Altman plots were calculated for validity. The test-retest reliability of the NNTD was good for CPT (ICC = 0.88), moderate for WDT (ICC = 0.545) and HPT (ICC = 0.710). The NNTD was valid for both trials of HPT and CPT and one trial for WDT compared to the Medoc TSA-2. In conclusion, the NNTD showed good to moderate reliability and was found to be valid compared to the Medoc TSA-2.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology
Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology Engineering-Biomedical Engineering
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: The Journal of Medical Engineering & Technology is an international, independent, multidisciplinary, bimonthly journal promoting an understanding of the physiological processes underlying disease processes and the appropriate application of technology. Features include authoritative review papers, the reporting of original research, and evaluation reports on new and existing techniques and devices. Each issue of the journal contains a comprehensive information service which provides news relevant to the world of medical technology, details of new products, book reviews, and selected contents of related journals.
期刊最新文献
News and product update. Safety, feasibility, and acceptability of a novel device to monitor ischaemic stroke patients. An enhanced Garter Snake Optimization-assisted deep learning model for lung cancer segmentation and classification using CT images. Transformative applications of additive manufacturing in biomedical engineering: bioprinting to surgical innovations. Characterisation of pulmonary air leak measurements using a mechanical ventilator in a bench setup.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1