Accuracy and reliability of the Ipswich touch test in identifying loss of protective sensation among diabetic patients

Q2 Health Professions
Foot Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI:10.1016/j.foot.2024.102132
Napassorn Khumchum , Nantawan Koonalinthip , Siriporn Janchai
{"title":"Accuracy and reliability of the Ipswich touch test in identifying loss of protective sensation among diabetic patients","authors":"Napassorn Khumchum ,&nbsp;Nantawan Koonalinthip ,&nbsp;Siriporn Janchai","doi":"10.1016/j.foot.2024.102132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To evaluate the accuracy of the Ipswich touch test compared to the 10-g monofilament test for identifying of loss of protective sensation in Thai patients with diabetes mellitus.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A cross-sectional observational study was conducted on Thai patients with diabetes mellitus who attended routine annual foot check-ups in an outpatient diabetes clinic. The loss of protective sensation was assessed by the Ipswich touch test and compared with the Semmes-Weinstein 10-g monofilament test. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios were calculated to measure the accuracy of the Ipswich touch test against 10-g monofilament as a reference standard. The interrater reliability of the Ipswich touch test was assessed by two raters.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In a study of 283 diabetic patients, 10-g monofilament detected a 25 % prevalence of loss protective sensation. The Ipswich touch test demonstrated a good diagnostic accuracy, with a sensitivity of 70.8 %, specificity of 98.6 %, and an area under the curve of 0.85 when compared to 10-g monofilament. Positive and negative predictive values were 94.4 % and 90.8 % respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 49.82, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.30. Interrater reliability, assessed with two raters in a subset of 93 participants, yielded a kappa of 0.88, indicating almost perfect agreement.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The Ipswich Touch Test demonstrated good accuracy and interrater reliability compared to the standard 10-g monofilament, thus establishing its effectiveness as a valuable diagnostic tool for identifying loss of protective sensation among diabetic patients. However, its relatively low sensitivity suggests it should be used with caution as a screening tool.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":12349,"journal":{"name":"Foot","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foot","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0958259224000658","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the accuracy of the Ipswich touch test compared to the 10-g monofilament test for identifying of loss of protective sensation in Thai patients with diabetes mellitus.

Methods

A cross-sectional observational study was conducted on Thai patients with diabetes mellitus who attended routine annual foot check-ups in an outpatient diabetes clinic. The loss of protective sensation was assessed by the Ipswich touch test and compared with the Semmes-Weinstein 10-g monofilament test. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values and likelihood ratios were calculated to measure the accuracy of the Ipswich touch test against 10-g monofilament as a reference standard. The interrater reliability of the Ipswich touch test was assessed by two raters.

Results

In a study of 283 diabetic patients, 10-g monofilament detected a 25 % prevalence of loss protective sensation. The Ipswich touch test demonstrated a good diagnostic accuracy, with a sensitivity of 70.8 %, specificity of 98.6 %, and an area under the curve of 0.85 when compared to 10-g monofilament. Positive and negative predictive values were 94.4 % and 90.8 % respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 49.82, and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.30. Interrater reliability, assessed with two raters in a subset of 93 participants, yielded a kappa of 0.88, indicating almost perfect agreement.

Conclusions

The Ipswich Touch Test demonstrated good accuracy and interrater reliability compared to the standard 10-g monofilament, thus establishing its effectiveness as a valuable diagnostic tool for identifying loss of protective sensation among diabetic patients. However, its relatively low sensitivity suggests it should be used with caution as a screening tool.

伊普斯维奇触摸测试在识别糖尿病患者保护性感觉缺失方面的准确性和可靠性
方法 对在糖尿病门诊接受年度例行足部检查的泰国糖尿病患者进行了一项横断面观察性研究。通过伊普斯维奇触摸试验评估保护性感觉的丧失情况,并与塞姆斯-韦恩斯坦 10 克单丝试验进行比较。通过计算灵敏度、特异性、预测值和似然比,来衡量伊普斯维奇触摸测试与作为参考标准的 10 克单丝测试的准确性。结果 在对 283 名糖尿病患者进行的研究中,10 克单丝检测出保护性感觉丧失的发生率为 25%。伊普斯维奇触摸测试显示出良好的诊断准确性,与 10 克单丝相比,敏感性为 70.8%,特异性为 98.6%,曲线下面积为 0.85。阳性和阴性预测值分别为 94.4 % 和 90.8 %。阳性似然比为 49.82,阴性似然比为 0.30。结论与标准的 10 克单丝相比,伊普斯维奇触觉测试显示出良好的准确性和互测可靠性,从而确立了其作为识别糖尿病患者保护性感觉缺失的重要诊断工具的有效性。不过,由于其灵敏度相对较低,因此作为筛查工具应谨慎使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Foot
Foot Health Professions-Podiatry
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: The Foot is an international peer-reviewed journal covering all aspects of scientific approaches and medical and surgical treatment of the foot. The Foot aims to provide a multidisciplinary platform for all specialties involved in treating disorders of the foot. At present it is the only journal which provides this inter-disciplinary opportunity. Primary research papers cover a wide range of disorders of the foot and their treatment, including diabetes, vascular disease, neurological, dermatological and infectious conditions, sports injuries, biomechanics, bioengineering, orthoses and prostheses.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信