scispace - formally typeset
Journal ArticleDOI

Value of quantitative sensory testing in neurological and pain disorders: NeuPSIG consensus.

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is a psychophysical method used to quantify somatosensory function in response to controlled stimuli in healthy subjects and patients as discussed by the authors, which has not gained a large acceptance among clinicians for many reasons, and in significant part because of the lack of information about standards for performing QST, its potential utility and interpretation of results.
Abstract
Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is a psychophysical method used to quantify somatosensory function in response to controlled stimuli in healthy subjects and patients. Although QST shares similarities with the quantitative assessment of hearing or vision, which is extensively used in clinical practice and research, it has not gained a large acceptance among clinicians for many reasons, and in significant part because of the lack of information about standards for performing QST, its potential utility, and interpretation of results. A consensus meeting was convened by the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain (NeuPSIG) to formulate recommendations for conducting QST in clinical practice and research. Research studies have confirmed the utility of QST for the assessment and monitoring of somatosensory deficits, particularly in diabetic and small fiber neuropathies; the assessment of evoked pains (mechanical and thermal allodynia or hyperalgesia); and the diagnosis of sensory neuropathies. Promising applications include the assessment of evoked pains in large-scale clinical trials and the study of conditioned pain modulation. In clinical practice, we recommend the use QST for screening for small and large fiber neuropathies; monitoring of somatosensory deficits; and monitoring of evoked pains, allodynia, and hyperalgesia. QST is not recommended as a stand-alone test for the diagnosis of neuropathic pain. For the conduct of QST in healthy subjects and in patients, we recommend use of predefined standardized stimuli and instructions, validated algorithms of testing, and reference values corrected for anatomical site, age, and gender. Interpretation of results should always take into account the clinical context, and patients with language and cognitive difficulties, anxiety, or litigation should not be considered eligible for QST. When appropriate standards, as discussed here, are applied, QST can provide important and unique information about the functional status of somatosensory system, which would be complementary to already existing clinical methods.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Allodynia and hyperalgesia in neuropathic pain: clinical manifestations and mechanisms

TL;DR: Better understanding of allodynia and hyperalgesia might provide clues to the underlying pathophysiology of neuropathic pain and, as such, they represent new or additional endpoints in pain trials.
Journal ArticleDOI

Patient phenotyping in clinical trials of chronic pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations.

TL;DR: Evidence is presented on the most promising phenotypic characteristics of patients that are most predictive of individual variation in analgesic treatment outcomes, and the measurement tools that are best suited to evaluate these characteristics.
Journal ArticleDOI

Can quantitative sensory testing move us closer to mechanism-based pain management?

TL;DR: Although evidence suggests that QST may be useful in a mechanism-based classification of pain, there are gaps in current understanding that need to be addressed including making QST more applicable in clinical settings.
Journal ArticleDOI

Exercise-Induced Hypoalgesia in Pain-Free and Chronic Pain Populations: State of the Art and Future Directions

TL;DR: This article provides a contemporary review of the acute effects of exercise on pain and pain sensitivity, including in people with chronic pain conditions, and discusses possible biological mechanisms and potential influence of sex and psychosocial factors.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Limitations of quantitative sensory testing when patients are biased toward a bad outcome

TL;DR: Because hyperesthesia precedes hypoesthesia in progressive neuropathy, this test is sensitive to the earliest stages of neuropathy associated with conditions such as diabetes and carpal tunnel syndrome.
Journal ArticleDOI

Pain-associated mild sensory deficits without hyperalgesia in chronic non-neuropathic pain

TL;DR: It is suggested that chronic non-neuropathic pain may induce slight sensory impairment for large Fiber function (bilateral) and small fiber function (ipsilateral), however, all changes are within the normal range, in contrast to patients with neuropathy.
Journal ArticleDOI

How to detect a sensory abnormality

TL;DR: A retrospective analysis of bedside sensory examination (BE) and quantitative sensory testing (QST) in a group of 32 patients with neuropathic pain following nerve injury reports that BE and QST gave the same finding in only half of the patients, and that bedside examination was more sensitive than QST in the other half.
Journal ArticleDOI

Clinical versus quantitative vibration assessment: improving clinical performance

TL;DR: Using a stepwise multivariate analysis, demographic and anthropomorphic patient characteristics associated with the difference between CVI and QVT for the various cohorts and the chosen QVT ranges of percentile abnormality are assessed.
Related Papers (5)