Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28859682›Full record

ArticleInfectious diseases of poverty2017

Early detection of neuropathy in leprosy: a comparison of five tests for field settings.

Inge Wagenaar, Erik Post, Wim Brandsma, Dan Ziegler, Moshiur Rahman, Khorshed Alam, Jan Hendrik Richardus

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Infectious diseases of poverty, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Inge WagenaarDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. inge.wagenaar10@gmail.com.
Erik PostKIT Health, Royal Tropical Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Wim BrandsmaIndependent leprosy consultant, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Dan ZieglerInstitute for Clinical Diabetology, German Diabetes Center at Heinrich Heine University, Leibniz Center for Diabetes Research, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Moshiur RahmanRural Health Program, The Leprosy Mission International- Bangladesh, Nilphamari, Bangladesh.
Khorshed AlamRural Health Program, The Leprosy Mission International- Bangladesh, Nilphamari, Bangladesh.
Jan Hendrik RichardusDepartment of Public Health, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Deutsches Diabetes-Zentrum e.V. · DEErasmus MC · NLErasmus University Rotterdam · NLNetherlands Leprosy Relief · NLRoyal Tropical Institute · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly detection and treatment of neuropathy in leprosy is important to prevent disabilities. A recent study showed that the Nerve Conduction Studies (NCS) and Warm Detection Thresholds (WDT) tests can detect leprosy neuropathy the earliest. These two tests are not practical under field conditions, however, because they require climate-controlled rooms and highly trained staff and are expensive. We assessed the usefulness of alternative test methods and their sensitivity and specificity to detect neuropathy at an early stage.

methodsThrough a literature search we identified five alternative devices that appeared user-friendly, more affordable, portable and/or battery-operated: the Neuropad®, Vibratip™, NC-Stat®DPNCheck™, NeuroQuick and the Thermal Sensibility Tester (TST), assessing respectively sweat function, vibration sensation, nerve conduction, cold sensation and warm sensation. In leprosy patients in Bangladesh, the posterior tibial and sural nerves that tested normal for the monofilament test and voluntary muscle test were assessed with the NCS and WDT as reference standard tests. The alternative devices were then tested on 94 nerves with abnormal WDT and/or NCS results and on 94 unaffected nerves. Sensitivity and specificity were the main outcomes.

resultsThe NeuroQuick and the TST showed very good sensitivity and specificity. On the sural nerve, the NeuroQuick had both a sensitivity and a specificity of 86%. The TST had a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 82%. Both the NC-Stat®DPNCheck™ and Vibratip™ had a high specificity (88% and 100%), but a low sensitivity (16% and 0%). On the posterior tibial nerve, the NeuroQuick and the TST also showed good sensitivity, but the sensitivity was lower than for the sural nerve. The Neuropad® had a sensitivity of 56% and a specificity of 61%.

conclusionsThe NeuroQuick and TST are good candidates for further field-testing for reliability and reproducibility. The feasibility of production on a larger scale should be examined.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBangladeshDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEarly DiagnosisFemaleHumansLeprosyMaleMiddle AgedNeurologic ExaminationPeripheral Nervous System DiseasesSensitivity and SpecificityYoung AdultDetectionField useLeprosyNeuropathySubclinical

Identifiers

PMID28859682
PMCPMC5580225
OpenAlexW2670386566

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.