Home Forums Marketplace Table of Contents Events Member List Site Map Register Mark Forums Read



Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums, for communication between foot health professionals about podiatry and related topics.

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members (PM), upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, earn CPD points and access many other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisments in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Tags: ,

Optimizing reliability and sensitivity of Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments

Reply
Submit Thread >  Submit to Digg Submit to Reddit Submit to Furl Submit to Del.icio.us Submit to Google Submit to Yahoo! This Submit to Technorati Submit to StumbleUpon Submit to Spurl Submit to Netscape  < Submit Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 25th May 2012, 02:11 PM
NewsBot's Avatar
NewsBot NewsBot is offline
The Admin that posts the news.
 
About:
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Zoo, where all good monkeys should be
Posts: 9,341
Join Date: Jan 2006
Marketplace reputation 53% (0)
Thanks: 7
Thanked 405 Times in 333 Posts
Default Optimizing reliability and sensitivity of Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments

Podiatry Arena members do not see these ads
Optimizing reliability and sensitivity of Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments for establishing point tactile thresholds.
Tracey EH, Greene AJ, Doty RL.
Physiol Behav. 2012 Feb 28;105(4):982-6.
Quote:
Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments (SWM) are widely used to assess tactile point pressure sensitivity. However, the reliability of SWMs has been questioned, standardization of stimulus presentation procedures is lacking, and the sensitivity measure is commonly confounded by the response criterion. This study sought to assess the reliability of two versions of a forced-choice single staircase SWM test with the goal of optimizing test reliability with a minimum number of test trials. Test-retest and intra-test reliability coefficients for SWM threshold values from the plantar halluces of 24 normal subjects were obtained using two versions of a forced-choice single-staircase procedure. One version followed a two-down one-up rule (2D) and the other a three-down one-up rule (3D). The 3D procedure was significantly more reliable than the 2D procedure for all sequential combinations of reversal pairs. A total of four 3D reversal pairs (i.e., eight reversals) were sufficient to achieve test-retest and intra-test reliability coefficients>0.90. High reliability with the minimum number of trials was obtained by calculating the threshold as the mean of eight reversals (test-retest r=0.93, p<0.001; Sessions 1 and 2 intra-test rs=0.87 and 0.92; ps<0.001). Identical median detection thresholds were noted for the two repeated test sessions (5.1g/mm(2)). The threshold values correlated with subject age despite the small range of ages tested, suggesting high sensitivity (Sessions 1 and 2 rs=0.61 and 0.63, ps<0.001). This study demonstrates that SWMs provide highly reliable and sensitive point pressure thresholds with very few trials when an appropriate psychophysical paradigm is employed. The brief forced-choice procedure described herein could serve as a basis for standardizing SWM stimulus presentation methods.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 25th May 2012, 05:04 PM
Admin2's Avatar
Admin2 Admin2 is offline
Administrator
 
About:
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 3,173
Join Date: May 2005
Marketplace reputation 0% (0)
Thanks: 12
Thanked 111 Times in 97 Posts
Default Re: Optimizing reliability and sensitivity of Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments

Related threads:
Other threads tagged with monofilaments and neurological testing
Which sites for monofilament testing
New Technology vs the 10g Monofilament
Monofilament testing withstands critiques
Use of 10g monofilament in diabetic foot assessment
Efficacy of Semmes Weinstein monofilaments
Threshold for detecting neuropathy with monofilaments
Reliability of the 10 g monofilament
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Translate This Page

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Efficacy of Semmes Weinstein monofilaments NewsBot Diabetic Foot & Wound Management 8 13th April 2013 12:48 PM
Optimizing the offloading properties of the total contact cast for plantar foot ulceration NewsBot Diabetic Foot & Wound Management 0 29th September 2010 04:47 PM
Patient thinks monofilaments are touching opposite foot Kahuna General Issues and Discussion Forum 6 25th May 2010 11:12 AM
instep sensitivity RSSFeedBot Foot Health Forum 0 11th April 2010 11:21 AM
Threshold for detecting neuropathy with monofilaments JFAR Diabetic Foot & Wound Management 2 12th September 2008 02:37 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

Finding your way around:

Browse the forums.

Search the site.

Browse the tags.

Search the tags.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:45 AM.