Table 2.
Outline of the Somatosensation Measurements of the Included Papers (n = 15) and the Difference of VPT between Study and Control Groups
| First author (year) | Type of study | Subjects | Measurements of somatosensation method (location) | Results | Differences in VPT scores | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | N | Age in years (mean ± SD) | Control | Study | ||||||||
| Group | Mean ± SD | Group | Mean ± SD | Group versus group | % | |||||||
| PNSD patients | ||||||||||||
| Bergin (1995)34 | CS | (C) | 32 | (42 ± 18) | VPT: neurothesiometer, 100 Hz (V) (medial malleoli) | (C) | 12.56a | (DN) | 29.65a | (C)-(DN) | 263 | |
| (DN) | 25 | (55 ± 14) | VPT: audiometer, 250 Hz (dB)(medial malleoli) | (C) | 36.00a | (DN) | 55.30a | |||||
| VPT: tuning fork, 64 Hz (arbitrary units)(medial malleoli) | (C) | 7.90a | (DN) | 4.65a | ||||||||
| VPT: neurothesiometer, 100 Hz (V)(tibial tuberosities) | (C) | 14.10a | (DN) | 27.15a | (C)-(DN) | 193 | ||||||
| VPT: audiometer, 250 Hz (dB)(tibial tuberosities) | (C) | 35.05a | (DN) | 52.85a | ||||||||
| VPT: tuning fork, 64 Hz (arbitrary units)(tibial tuberosities) | (C) | 7.85a | (DN) | 5.05a | ||||||||
| Boucher (1995)25 | CSR | (C) | 7 | (60.6 ± 5.6) | Valk scoreb | (C) | 0 | (DN) | 12.0 ± 7.4 | |||
| (DN) | 12 | (62.5 ± 7.4) | ||||||||||
| Corriveau (2000)26 | CS | (C) | 15 | (69.3 ± 5.1) | Valk scoreb | (C) | 0.4 ± 0.8 | (DN) | 15 ± 8.2 | |||
| (DN) | 15 | (68.6 ± 5.5) | VPT: vibrometer, 120 Hz (μm)(halluces) | (C) | 1 ± 0.53 | (DN) | 26.8 ± 35 | (C)-(DN) | 2680 | |||
| TPST: SW monofilaments (% > 3.84)(halluces) | (C) | 20.0 | (DN) | 87.7 | ||||||||
| Katoulis (1996)34 | CS | (C) | 20 | (50.6 ± 8.6) | NDSc | (C) | 0 | (DN-NU) | 7.5 ± 6.8 | (C)-(DN-NU) | 271 | |
| (DC) | 20 | (47.6 ± 10.7) | (DC) | 0 | (DN-U) | 8 ± 7.9 | (C)-(DN-U) | 311 | ||||
| (DC)-(DN-NU) | 265 | |||||||||||
| (DN-NU) | 20 | (52.9 ± 8.8) | VPT: biothesiometer, max 50 V (V)(halluces) | (C) | 11.8 ± 3.6 | (DN-NU) | 32 ± 5.6 | (DC)-(DN-U) | 303 | |||
| (DN-U) | 20 | (54.1 ± 7.1) | (DC) | 12.1 ± 4.6 | (DN-U) | 36.7 ± 8.3 | ||||||
| Lafond (2004)36 | CS | (C) | 20 | (72.3 ± 5.8) | Valk scoreb | (C) | 0.3 ± 0.7 | (DN) | 12.6 ± 7.0 | |||
| (DN) | 11 | (69.1 ± 5.1) | VPT (μm) | (C) | 1.0 ± 0.6 | (DN) | 20.3 ± 30.2 | (C)-(DN) | 2032 | |||
| TPST: SW monofilaments (% > 3.84) | (C) | 15 | (DN) | 82 | ||||||||
| Nardone (2000)41 | CS | (C) | 46 | (44.1 ± 9.7) | Neurological disability scored | (CMT1A) | 27.3 | |||||
| (CMT1A) | 15 | (40.3 ± 16.6) | ||||||||||
| Nardone (2006)42 | CS | (C) | 20 | 29-77 | Neurological disability scored | (DN) | 24.1 ± 14.8 | |||||
| (DN) | 14 | 43-77 | (CMT1A) | 31.4 ± 14.9 | ||||||||
| (CMT1A) | 5 | 32-63 | (CMT2) | 27.4 ± 18.6 | ||||||||
| (CMT2) | 8 | 18-61 | ||||||||||
| Richerson (2007)46 | CS | (C) | 11 | (72.92 ± 5.21) | VPT: Medoc vibrometer (V)(halluces and third metatarsal dominant foot)(before Tai Chi training) | (C) | 11.4 ± 8.3 | (DNmod) | 39.4 ± 17.9 | (C)-(DNmod) | 346 | |
| (DNmod) | 11 | (72.57 ± 5.38) | (DNsev) | 114.3 ± 17.5 | (C)-(DNsev) | 1003 | ||||||
| (DNsev) | (74.50 ± 7.72) | |||||||||||
| Rogers (2001)47e | CS | (YC) | 8 | (26.9) | VPT: vibrator, 200 Hz (μm)(tibial tuberosities) | (YC) | 5.45 | (DN) | 33.63 | (YC)-(DN) | 617 | |
| (E-NF) | 15 | (74.7 ± 4.5) | (E-NF) | 33.63 | (E-F) | 43.63 | (E-NF)-(DN) | 100 | ||||
| (DN) | 14 | (60.0) | TPST: SW monofilaments (mN)(lateral malleoli) | (YC) | 0.92 | (DN) | 2.00 | (E-F)-(DN) | 77 | |||
| (E-F) | 10 | (74.2 ± 2.9) | (E-NF) | 1.39 | (E-F) | 1.43 | ||||||
| TPST: SW monofilaments (mN)(fibula head) | (YC) | 0.50 | (DN) | 1.25 | ||||||||
| (E-NF) | 1.32 | (E-F) | 1.36 | |||||||||
| Simoneau (1994)19 | CSR | (C) | 17 | (54.7 ± 8.5) | VPT: vibrometer, 60 Hz and max 50 V (V)(halluces, plantar surface) | (C) | 11.8 ± 4.7 | (DN) | 47.4 ± 3.3 | (C)-(DN) | 402 | |
| (DC) | 17 | (54.2 ± 8.1) | (DC) | 13.9 ± 6.4 | (DC)-(DN) | 341 | ||||||
| (DN) | 17 | (55.0 ± 7.9) | TPST: SW monafilaments (SW ratingf)(halluces, plantar surface) | (C) | 2.9 ± 0.5 | (DN) | 4.6 ± 1.4 | |||||
| (DC) | 3.3 ± 0.5 | |||||||||||
| JMPT: Two individually movable foot plates (degrees)(ankle) | (C) | 1.8 ± 1.4 | (DN) | 3.8 ± 3.6 | ||||||||
| (DC) | 1.5 ± 1.0 | |||||||||||
| Uccioli (1995)23 | CS | (C) | 21 | (31 ± 0.9) | VPT: biothesiometer (V)(lateral malleoli) | (C) | 10.3 ± 0.6 | (DN) | 23.5 ± 3.6 | (C)-(DN) | 228 | |
| (DC) | 23 | (31 ± 1.1) | (DC) | 9.7 ± 0.4 | (DC)-(DN) | 242 | ||||||
| (DN) | 10 | (35 ± 1.9) | VPT: biothesiometer (V)(hallucis, dorsal surface) | (C) | 9.6 ± 0.3 | (DN) | 29.5 ± 5.0 | (C)-(DN) | 307 | |||
| (DC) | 7.4 ± 0.3 | (DC)-(DN) | 399 | |||||||||
| Uccioli (1997)50 | CS | (C) | 31 | (31.9 ± 0.9) | VPT: biothesiometer (V)(lateral malleoli) | (C) | 9.18 ± 0.12 | (DN) | 28.15 ± 5.41 | (C)-(DN) | 307 | |
| (DC) | 18 | (31.3 ± 1.8) | (DC) | 10.33 ± 0.61 | (DC)-(DN) | 273 | ||||||
| (DN) | 7 | (35.1 ± 3.1) | VPT: biothesiometer (V)(hallucis, dorsal surface) | (C) | 9.01 ± 0.11 | (DN) | 34.82 ± 6.68 | (C)-(DN) | 387 | |||
| (DC) | 7.22 ± 0.45 | (DC)-(DN) | 482 | |||||||||
| Healthy subjects | ||||||||||||
| Hertel (1996)32e | (H) | 16 | (22.6 ± 1.9) | JMPT: isokinetic dynamometer (degrees) with 10° eversion | (H) | 2.1 | (H-H) | 2.4 | ||||
| JMPT: isokinetic dynamometer (degrees) with 20° inversion | (H) | 4.2 | (H-H) | 3.9 | ||||||||
| JMPT: isokinetic dynamometer (degrees) with 30° inversion | (H) | 4.0 | (H-H) | 3.6 | ||||||||
| Konradsen (1993)35 | CS | (HM) | 7 | 27 till 38 | JMPT: active joint positioning (degrees)g | (HM) | 1.7 | (HM-H) | 1.8 | |||
| JMPT: passive joint positioning (degrees)h | (HM) | 1.8 | (HM-H) | 5.4 | ||||||||
| McKeon (2007)5 | CSR | (HM) | 16 | (26.4 ± 6.5) | TpD: anesthesiometer (mm) | (H) | 12.4 ± 2.7 | (H-H) | 16.9 ± 6.3 | |||
| (HW) | 16 | (21.4 ± 2.6) | Pressure algometry: algometer (kg) | (H) | 1.5 ± 0.5 | (H-H) | 2.1 ± 0.7 | |||||
CS, cross-sectional study; CSR, cross-sectional study with randomization of trials; C, control subjects; DN, diabetic neuropathy patients; DC, diabetes control subjects; DN-NU, diabetic neuropathy patients without history of ulceration; DN-U, diabetic neuropathy patients with history of ulceration; DNmod, moderate diabetic neuropathy; DNsev, severe diabetic neuropathy; YC, young control subjects; E-NF, elderly nonfallers; E-F, elderly fallers; H, healthy subjects, men and women; H-H, healthy subjects hypoesthesia; HM, healthy men; HM-H, healthy men hypoesthesia; HW, healthy women; TPST, touch-pressure sensation threshold; SW, Semmes Weinstein; JMPT, joint movement perception threshold; TpD, two-point discrimination; SD, standard deviation.
The measures of left and right were averaged.
The scoring system has four levels of neuropathy: normal, mild, moderate, and severe. It consists of clinical testing of sensory modalities (light touch, vibration, and pain), anatomic level below which light touch sensation is impaired, muscle strength, and ankle jerk. A total score of 0 is graded as no polyneuropathy, 1–9 as mild polyneuropathy, 10–18 as moderate polyneuropathy, and 19–33 as severe polyneuropathy.
The NDS is the product of scoring ankle reflexes plus vibration, pin prick, and temperature (cold tuning fork) sensation at the great toe. The maximum NDS is 10, and scores of 3–5, 6–8, and 9–10 were defined as evidence of mild, moderate, and severe signs, respectively.
The neurological disability score exists of lower limb muscle strength (distal and proximal muscle groups), touch pressure, vibration, joint position, pricking pain, and quadriceps and Achilles tendon reflexes.
The values described in the table are measured of the graphs in the original article.
Rating of measurements with Semmes Weinstein monofilaments ranging form 1.65 to 6.65. The higher the number, the more reduced somatosensation.
The subject inverts the ankle from a neutral position at a speed of approximately 15 /s. The foot was then held by the investigator at one of five positions of inversion (5°, 10°, 15°, 20°, or 25°) for 5 s. The subject moved his foot back to neutral and then attempted to replicate the test position actively. A mean error of active positioning was calculated.
The ankle was passively moved by the investigator to one of five positions of inversion (5°, 10°, 15°, 20°, or 25°). The inversion position was reached in 1 s and was held for 5 s. The ankle was then returned to neutral and then gradually inverted at a speed of 2°/s. The subject was asked to say when he thought that his foot had regained the initial position. The error in reproduction of the initial position was recorded, and the mean error was calculated.