Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) - Does assessing ... - TI Pharma

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 3 Somatosensory profiles but not numbers of somatosensory abnormalities of neuropathic pain patients correspond with neuropathic pain grading Konopka K.H., Harbers M., Houghton A., Kortekaas R., van Vliet A., Timmerman W., den Boer J.A., Struys M.M.R.F., van Wijhe M. submitted
3. Somatosensory function and neuropathic pain grading Abstract Due to the lack of a specific diagnostic tool a grading system to categorize pain as ‘definite’, ‘probable’, ‘possible’ and ‘unlikely’ neuropathic pain was proposed. Somatosensory abnormalities are common in neuropathic pain and it has been suggested that a greater number of abnormalities would be present in patients with ‘probable’ and ‘definite’ grades. To test this hypothesis, we investigated the presence of somatosensory abnormalities by means of <strong>QST</strong> in patients with a clinical diagnosis of neuropathic pain and correlated the number of sensory abnormalities and sensory profiles to the different grades. Of patients who were clinically diagnosed with neuropathic pain, only 60% were graded as ‘definite’ or ‘probable’, while 40% were graded as ‘possible’ or ‘unlikely’ neuropathic pain. Apparently, there is a mismatch between a clinical neuropathic pain diagnosis and neuropathic pain grading. Contrary to the expectation, patients with ‘probable’ and ‘definite’ grades did not have a greater number of abnormalities. Instead, similar numbers of somatosensory abnormalities were identified for each grade. The profiles of sensory signs in ‘definite’ and ‘probable’ neuropathic pain were not significantly different, but different from the ‘unlikely’ grade. This latter difference was due to a different frequency of a mixture of sensory gain and loss and of sensory loss only. The grading system allows a separation of neuropathic and non-neuropathic pain based on profiles but not on the total amount of sensory abnormalities. Our findings indicate that patient selection based on grading of neuropathic pain may provide advantages iselecting homogenous groups for clinical research.
Page 2: Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST)
Page 5 and 6: Promotores: Prof. dr. M.M.R.F. Stru
Page 7 and 8: Paranimfen Marten Harbers Aribert B
Page 9 and 10: Contents 3.3.4. Sensory changes at
Page 11: 0 Contents Chapter 5 Do patients wi
Page 14: Chapter 1 General introduction
Page 17 and 18: 1. General introduction stimuli. C-
Page 19 and 20: 1. General introduction Patients re
Page 21 and 22: 1. General introduction 0 drugs (NS
Page 23 and 24: 1. General introduction Table 1-2:
Page 26 and 27: Chapter 2 Bilateral sensory abnorma
Page 28 and 29: 2. Bilateral abnormalities in neuro
Page 46: 2. Bilateral abnormalities in neuro
Page 51 and 52: 0 3. Somatosensory function and neu
Page 53 and 54: 3. Somatosensory function and neuro
Page 67 and 68: 4. QST and neuropathic pain mechani
Page 81 and 82: 5. QST in patients with tendinopath
Page 94 and 95: Chapter 6 General discussion and Su
Page 96 and 97: 6. General discussion and Summary s
Page 98 and 99:
6. General discussion and Summary s
Page 100 and 101:
6. General discussion and Summary T
Page 102 and 103:
6. General discussion and Summary Q
Page 104 and 105:
6. General discussion and Summary S
Page 106 and 107:
References Abate M, Silbernagel KG,
Page 108 and 109:
de la Llave-Rincon AI, Fernandez-de
Page 110 and 111:
Kehlet H, Jensen TS, Woolf CJ. 2006
Page 112 and 113:
Robinson JM, Cook JL, Purdam C, Vis
Page 114 and 115:
Visentini PJ, Khan KM, Cook JL, Kis
Page 116 and 117:
Nederlandse samenvatting Met de ont
Page 118 and 119:
Acknowledgement To produce a work s
show all

Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) - Does assessing ... - TI Pharma

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?