Median nerve latency measurement agreement between portable and conventional methods
(2000) In Journal of Hand Surgery (British Volume) 25(1). p.73-77- Abstract
- A portable nerve conduction testing device was compared with a conventional method of measuring median nerve distal latencies. In a population-based study, a health questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 3000 participants (aged 25 to 74 years). Two hundred and sixty-two responders with numbness and/or tingling in the median nerve distribution, and 125 asymptomatic responders underwent clinical examination as well as portable and conventional median nerve distal latency measurements. Motor latency measured with the portable device was on average 0.1 millisecond (ms) lower than motor latency measured with the conventional method (95% limits of agreement, -0.8-0.5 ms). Sensory latency (wrist-to-index finger) measured with the portable... (More)
- A portable nerve conduction testing device was compared with a conventional method of measuring median nerve distal latencies. In a population-based study, a health questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 3000 participants (aged 25 to 74 years). Two hundred and sixty-two responders with numbness and/or tingling in the median nerve distribution, and 125 asymptomatic responders underwent clinical examination as well as portable and conventional median nerve distal latency measurements. Motor latency measured with the portable device was on average 0.1 millisecond (ms) lower than motor latency measured with the conventional method (95% limits of agreement, -0.8-0.5 ms). Sensory latency (wrist-to-index finger) measured with the portable device was on average 0.3 ms lower than sensory latency (long finger-to-wrist) measured with the conventional method (95% limits of agreement, -0.7-0.1 ms). Strong correlations were found between the latencies measured by the portable and conventional methods (Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.90-0.93). The agreement between the portable and conventional methods in measuring median nerve distal latencies appears to be acceptable. The cut-off value for abnormal sensory latency needs to be lower for the portable than the conventional method if the present measurement techniques are used. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/1116398
- author
- Atroshi, Isam LU ; Gummesson, Christina LU ; Johnsson, R ; Ornstein, Ewald LU and Rosen, I
- publishing date
- 2000
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Journal of Hand Surgery (British Volume)
- volume
- 25
- issue
- 1
- pages
- 73 - 77
- publisher
- SAGE Publications
- external identifiers
-
- pmid:10763730
- scopus:0034064435
- pmid:10763730
- ISSN
- 0266-7681
- DOI
- 10.1054/jhsb.1999.0406
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- no
- additional info
- The information about affiliations in this record was updated in December 2015. The record was previously connected to the following departments: Division of Physiotherapy (Closed 2012) (013042000)
- id
- 9300a47b-8025-4754-87ea-012b1575cc38 (old id 1116398)
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 15:23:41
- date last changed
- 2022-01-28 05:05:15
@article{9300a47b-8025-4754-87ea-012b1575cc38,
abstract = {{A portable nerve conduction testing device was compared with a conventional method of measuring median nerve distal latencies. In a population-based study, a health questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 3000 participants (aged 25 to 74 years). Two hundred and sixty-two responders with numbness and/or tingling in the median nerve distribution, and 125 asymptomatic responders underwent clinical examination as well as portable and conventional median nerve distal latency measurements. Motor latency measured with the portable device was on average 0.1 millisecond (ms) lower than motor latency measured with the conventional method (95% limits of agreement, -0.8-0.5 ms). Sensory latency (wrist-to-index finger) measured with the portable device was on average 0.3 ms lower than sensory latency (long finger-to-wrist) measured with the conventional method (95% limits of agreement, -0.7-0.1 ms). Strong correlations were found between the latencies measured by the portable and conventional methods (Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.90-0.93). The agreement between the portable and conventional methods in measuring median nerve distal latencies appears to be acceptable. The cut-off value for abnormal sensory latency needs to be lower for the portable than the conventional method if the present measurement techniques are used.}},
author = {{Atroshi, Isam and Gummesson, Christina and Johnsson, R and Ornstein, Ewald and Rosen, I}},
issn = {{0266-7681}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{1}},
pages = {{73--77}},
publisher = {{SAGE Publications}},
series = {{Journal of Hand Surgery (British Volume)}},
title = {{Median nerve latency measurement agreement between portable and conventional methods}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1054/jhsb.1999.0406}},
doi = {{10.1054/jhsb.1999.0406}},
volume = {{25}},
year = {{2000}},
}