Stacey Fisher, Hannah Gray, Nicci Kelsall, Donna Lowes, Leon Jonker
{"title":"Pin-prick (Medipin) assessment for neuropathy in diabetes: Prospective screening study in primary care.","authors":"Stacey Fisher, Hannah Gray, Nicci Kelsall, Donna Lowes, Leon Jonker","doi":"10.1016/j.pcd.2024.10.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Diabetic patients are at elevated risk of neuropathy; early detection is desirable to minimise the risk of complications. The Medipin pin-prick device was appraised as a screening tool for diabetic neuropathy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prospective cross-sectional comparative screening study in primary care setting, involving 389 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The Medipin pin-prick method, involving dorsal application on the hallux of both feet, was compared to 10 g monofilament testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The ternary and semi-quantitative approach for scoring Medipin pin-prick sensation give very similar results (Spearman rho 0.67, P < 0.001). A total of 59 % patients had no signs of neuropathy (sharp sensation), 38 % reported impaired sensation (dull sensation), and an absence of sensation occurred in 3 % of patients. For the monofilament dorsal method, the figures were 79 % no neuropathy, 14 % elevated risk, and 7 % neuropathy respectively, and with the monofilament plantar method 87 % of patients had no neuropathy and 13 % did. Correlation analyses showed that taller patients and those with existing neuropathic pain are at very modest increased risk of neuropathy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Medipin pin-prick device can identify diabetic neuropathy and detects (first signs of) neuropathy in relatively more patients than 10 g monofilament testing. The differential targeting of nerve types, namely predominant small (Medipin) versus large (monofilament) fibre, likely underpins the difference in outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":94177,"journal":{"name":"Primary care diabetes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Primary care diabetes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcd.2024.10.003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: Diabetic patients are at elevated risk of neuropathy; early detection is desirable to minimise the risk of complications. The Medipin pin-prick device was appraised as a screening tool for diabetic neuropathy.
Methods: Prospective cross-sectional comparative screening study in primary care setting, involving 389 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The Medipin pin-prick method, involving dorsal application on the hallux of both feet, was compared to 10 g monofilament testing.
Results: The ternary and semi-quantitative approach for scoring Medipin pin-prick sensation give very similar results (Spearman rho 0.67, P < 0.001). A total of 59 % patients had no signs of neuropathy (sharp sensation), 38 % reported impaired sensation (dull sensation), and an absence of sensation occurred in 3 % of patients. For the monofilament dorsal method, the figures were 79 % no neuropathy, 14 % elevated risk, and 7 % neuropathy respectively, and with the monofilament plantar method 87 % of patients had no neuropathy and 13 % did. Correlation analyses showed that taller patients and those with existing neuropathic pain are at very modest increased risk of neuropathy.
Conclusions: The Medipin pin-prick device can identify diabetic neuropathy and detects (first signs of) neuropathy in relatively more patients than 10 g monofilament testing. The differential targeting of nerve types, namely predominant small (Medipin) versus large (monofilament) fibre, likely underpins the difference in outcomes.