Foot (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2024
Accuracy and reliability of the Ipswich touch test in identifying loss of protective sensation among diabetic patients.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Khumchum Napassorn, Koonalinthip Nantawan, Janchai Siriporn
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of the Ipswich touch test compared to the 10-g monofilament test for identifying of loss of protective sensation in Thai patients with diabetes mellitus.
METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted on Thai patients with diabetes mellitus who attended routine annual foot check-ups in an outpatient diabetes clinic. The loss of protective sensation was assessed by the Ipswich touch test and compared with the Semmes-Weinstein 10-g monofilament test. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios were calculated to measure the accuracy of the Ipswich touch test against 10-g monofilament as a reference standard. The interrater reliability of the Ipswich touch test was assessed by two raters.
RESULTS: In a study of 283 diabetic patients, 10-g monofilament detected a 25 % prevalence of loss protective sensation. The Ipswich touch test demonstrated a good diagnostic accuracy, with a sensitivity of 70.8 %, specificity of 98.6 %, and an area under the curve of 0.85 when compared to 10-g monofilament. Positive and negative predictive values were 94.4 % and 90.8 % respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 49.82, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.30. Interrater reliability, assessed with two raters in a subset of 93 participants, yielded a kappa of 0.88, indicating almost perfect agreement.
CONCLUSIONS: The Ipswich Touch Test demonstrated good accuracy and interrater reliability compared to the standard 10-g monofilament, thus establishing its effectiveness as a valuable diagnostic tool for identifying loss of protective sensation among diabetic patients. However, its relatively low sensitivity suggests it should be used with caution as a screening tool.
METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted on Thai patients with diabetes mellitus who attended routine annual foot check-ups in an outpatient diabetes clinic. The loss of protective sensation was assessed by the Ipswich touch test and compared with the Semmes-Weinstein 10-g monofilament test. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios were calculated to measure the accuracy of the Ipswich touch test against 10-g monofilament as a reference standard. The interrater reliability of the Ipswich touch test was assessed by two raters.
RESULTS: In a study of 283 diabetic patients, 10-g monofilament detected a 25 % prevalence of loss protective sensation. The Ipswich touch test demonstrated a good diagnostic accuracy, with a sensitivity of 70.8 %, specificity of 98.6 %, and an area under the curve of 0.85 when compared to 10-g monofilament. Positive and negative predictive values were 94.4 % and 90.8 % respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 49.82, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.30. Interrater reliability, assessed with two raters in a subset of 93 participants, yielded a kappa of 0.88, indicating almost perfect agreement.
CONCLUSIONS: The Ipswich Touch Test demonstrated good accuracy and interrater reliability compared to the standard 10-g monofilament, thus establishing its effectiveness as a valuable diagnostic tool for identifying loss of protective sensation among diabetic patients. However, its relatively low sensitivity suggests it should be used with caution as a screening tool.