This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by ATROSHI, I. Articles by ROSÉN, I. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by ATROSHI, I. Articles by ROSÉN, I. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Median Nerve Latency Measurement Agreement Between Portable and Conventional Methods

From the Department of Orthopedics, Hässleholm-Kristianstad Hospitals, Kristianstad, Sweden

Correspondence: I. Atroshi MD, Hand Surgery Section, Department of Orthopedics, Hässleholm-Kristianstad, Hospitals, SE-291 85 Kristianstad, Sweden., E-mail: isam.atroshi{at}mailbox.swipnet.se

A portable nerve conduction testing device was compared with a conventional method of measuring median nerve distal latencies. In a population-based study, a health questionnaire was mailed to a random sample of 3000 participants (aged 25 to 74 years). Two hundred and sixty-two responders with numbness and/or tingling in the median nerve distribution, and 125 asymptomatic responders underwent clinical examination as well as portable and conventional median nerve distal latency measurements. Motor latency measured with the portable device was on average 0.1 millisecond (ms) lower than motor latency measured with the conventional method (95% limits of agreement, –0.8–0.5 ms). Sensory latency (wrist-to-index finger) measured with the portable device was on average 0.3 ms lower than sensory latency (long finger-to-wrist) measured with the conventional method (95% limits of agreement, –0.7–0.1 ms). Strong correlations were found between the latencies measured by the portable and conventional methods (Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.90–0.93). The agreement between the portable and conventional methods in measuring median nerve distal latencies appears to be acceptable. The cut-of value for abnormal sensory latency needs to be lower for the portable than the conventional method if the present measurement techniques are used.

Journal of Hand Surgery (British and European Volume), Vol. 25, No. 1, 73-77 (2000)
DOI: 10.1054/jhsb.1999.0316


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?