4.5 Article

Characterizing Touch Discrimination Impairment from Pooled Stroke Samples Using the Tactile Discrimination Test: Updated Criteria for Interpretation and Brief Test Version for Use in Clinical Practice Settings

期刊

BRAIN SCIENCES
卷 13, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/brainsci13040533

关键词

cerebrovascular accident; somatosensory; touch; standardized assessment; upper extremity; hand

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Somatosensory loss post-stroke is common, with touch sensation characteristically impaired. Yet, quantitative, standardized measures of touch discrimination available for clinical use are currently limited. The study aimed to characterize touch impairment and determine the sensitivity and specificity of shorter versions of the Tactile Discrimination Test (TDT). The findings showed that touch impairment was common in stroke survivors, and briefer versions of the TDT demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity.
Somatosensory loss post-stroke is common, with touch sensation characteristically impaired. Yet, quantitative, standardized measures of touch discrimination available for clinical use are currently limited. We aimed to characterize touch impairment and re-establish the criterion of abnormality of the Tactile Discrimination Test (TDT) using pooled data and to determine the sensitivity and specificity of briefer test versions. Baseline data from stroke survivors (n = 207) and older neurologically healthy controls (n = 100) assessed on the TDT was extracted. Scores were re-analyzed to determine an updated criterion of impairment and the ability of brief test versions to detect impairment. Updated scoring using an area score was used to calculate the TDT percent maximum area (PMA) score. Touch impairment was common for the contralesional hand (83%) but also present in the ipsilesional hand (42%). The criterion of abnormality was established as 73.1 PMA across older adults and genders. High sensitivity and specificity were found for briefer versions of the TDT (25 vs. 50 trials; 12 or 15 vs. 25 trials), with sensitivity ranging between 91.8 and 96.4% and specificity between 72.5 and 95.0%. Conclusion: Updated criterion of abnormality and the high sensitivity and specificity of brief test versions support the use of the TDT in clinical practice settings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据