Assessing the vibration perception threshold in a community sample of adult Ghanaians.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
16
02
2022
accepted:
03
09
2023
medline:
10
11
2023
pubmed:
8
11
2023
entrez:
8
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The vibration perception threshold (VPT) helps evaluate human somatosensory function and diagnose peripheral neuropathy. To optimize its use as a primary neurologic tool, it is imperative to establish its typical values in healthy subjects and assess the factors affecting its variability in an individual to ensure consistency in its application. Demographic data and a brief medical history were collected from 391 non-diabetic adults aged 30-80 at Kpone-on-Sea in Ghana. The VPT was measured at the tip of the big toe, the medial malleolus, the tip of the middle finger, and the head of the ulna of each participant using a Horwell Neurothesiometer. The variability of VPT was assessed vis-à-vis the following factors: gender, age, fasting plasma sugar and body mass index. The mean age of participants was 48.4 ± 0.7 years, and the female-to-male ratio was 1.46. The overall VPT values ranged from 5.74 ± 0.14 volts to 8.55 ± 0.18 volts in the lower limbs and 3.61 ± 0.06 volts to 5.00 ± 0.08 volts in the upper limbs. Age was found to be the only factor that could predict VPT for both the lower and upper limbs (P < 0.001). One-Way Analysis of Variance with Tukey's posthoc showed that the VPT in the feet was significantly higher than that in the hands. Generally, the VPT was high on proximal sites and low on distal sites indicating that the vibration sensation increased from proximal to distal direction. Therefore, distal areas should be used for VPT testing with a Neurothesiomer. Age was found to be the only factor that affected VPT variability. Hence, the practical application of VPT will require age-specific reference ranges to cater for older adults.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The vibration perception threshold (VPT) helps evaluate human somatosensory function and diagnose peripheral neuropathy. To optimize its use as a primary neurologic tool, it is imperative to establish its typical values in healthy subjects and assess the factors affecting its variability in an individual to ensure consistency in its application.
METHODS
Demographic data and a brief medical history were collected from 391 non-diabetic adults aged 30-80 at Kpone-on-Sea in Ghana. The VPT was measured at the tip of the big toe, the medial malleolus, the tip of the middle finger, and the head of the ulna of each participant using a Horwell Neurothesiometer. The variability of VPT was assessed vis-à-vis the following factors: gender, age, fasting plasma sugar and body mass index.
RESULTS
The mean age of participants was 48.4 ± 0.7 years, and the female-to-male ratio was 1.46. The overall VPT values ranged from 5.74 ± 0.14 volts to 8.55 ± 0.18 volts in the lower limbs and 3.61 ± 0.06 volts to 5.00 ± 0.08 volts in the upper limbs. Age was found to be the only factor that could predict VPT for both the lower and upper limbs (P < 0.001). One-Way Analysis of Variance with Tukey's posthoc showed that the VPT in the feet was significantly higher than that in the hands.
CONCLUSIONS
Generally, the VPT was high on proximal sites and low on distal sites indicating that the vibration sensation increased from proximal to distal direction. Therefore, distal areas should be used for VPT testing with a Neurothesiomer. Age was found to be the only factor that affected VPT variability. Hence, the practical application of VPT will require age-specific reference ranges to cater for older adults.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37939073
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291606
pii: PONE-D-22-04770
pmc: PMC10631668
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0291606Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2023 Djankpa et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
PLoS One. 2021 Apr 6;16(4):e0249461
pubmed: 33822804
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1988 Jan 23;296(6617):233-5
pubmed: 3124898
Diabetes Care. 2010 Dec;33(12):2635-41
pubmed: 20833868
Diabetes Care. 1994 Jun;17(6):557-60
pubmed: 8082524
Adv Child Dev Behav. 2017;52:227-268
pubmed: 28215286
J Neurophysiol. 2003 Mar;89(3):1567-75
pubmed: 12626628
Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2012 Apr-Jun;6(2):85-9
pubmed: 23153975
Somatosens Mot Res. 2006 Mar-Jun;23(1-2):73-81
pubmed: 16846962
PLoS One. 2017 Sep 7;12(9):e0183973
pubmed: 28880907
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2014 May;8(3):621-2
pubmed: 24876629
Neurol Res Pract. 2020 Jul 15;2:20
pubmed: 33324924
BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2016 May 05;4(1):e000163
pubmed: 27239314
BMC Public Health. 2013 Sep 03;13:797
pubmed: 24004464
IEEE Trans Haptics. 2016 Oct-Dec;9(4):586-597
pubmed: 27244751
BMC Geriatr. 2003 Feb 25;3:1
pubmed: 12600276
Int Wound J. 2014 Apr;11(2):147-51
pubmed: 22892021
Cereb Cortex. 2007 Dec;17(12):2878-91
pubmed: 17372277
Prim Care Diabetes. 2009 Feb;3(1):17-21
pubmed: 19071079
Conscious Cogn. 2011 Sep;20(3):603-17
pubmed: 21190869
Am Fam Physician. 2020 Dec 15;102(12):732-739
pubmed: 33320513
Diabetologia. 2007 Nov;50(11):2305-12
pubmed: 17846743
Diabet Med. 1991 Feb-Mar;8(2):157-61
pubmed: 1827402
Neuroimaging Clin N Am. 2014 Feb;24(1):49-65
pubmed: 24210312
Front Integr Neurosci. 2015 Jan 08;8:97
pubmed: 25620920
J Foot Ankle Res. 2020 Jan 16;13:3
pubmed: 31988664
Neuroimage. 2021 May 15;232:117912
pubmed: 33652142
PLoS One. 2013 Nov 06;8(11):e80856
pubmed: 24223231
PLoS One. 2020 Oct 7;15(10):e0237733
pubmed: 33027294
PLoS One. 2015 Nov 06;10(11):e0139689
pubmed: 26545096
Med Eng Phys. 2013 Aug;35(8):1221-7
pubmed: 23357339