Advanced

Median nerve latency measurement agreement between portable and conventional methods

Atroshi, Isam LU ; Gummesson, Christina LU ; Johnsson, R; Ornstein, Ewald LU and Rosen, I (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:
author
publishing date
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
ISSN
0266-7681
DOI
10.1054/jhsb.1999.0406
language
English
LU publication?
no
id
9300a47b-8025-4754-87ea-012b1575cc38 (old id 1116398)
date added to LUP
2008-07-01 12:44:12
date last changed
2017-01-01 06:38:49
@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},
  volume       = {25},
  year         = {2000},
}