Threshold detection and Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments.

Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments provide a repeatable instrument stimulus with a small standard deviation in contrast to other handheld test instruments, making them an optimum choice for objective sensory testing in a variety of clinics. Normal sensory detection thresholds for the entire body, and the stimulus force for each filament, were determined by Weinstein. He found a nylon filament of 0.005 in wide and 38 mm long (mean force, 68 mg) to be a good predictor of "normal" light touch-deep pressure threshold for the hands and most of the body. However, manufacturers of the nylon used in making the filaments allow an 8-10% tolerance in diameter. This small change in diameter can result in small variations in mean force among filaments of a given size. It has not been previously determined what effect this small variance in force has on the accuracy of the 2.83 (marking number) 0.005-in wide filament most often used for normal threshold detection. This study compared the 2.83 filaments available at the Gillis W. Long Hansen's Disease Center, which have a mean force of 62 mg, with those from North Coast Medical, Inc., which have a mean force of 95 mg. The filaments were used by 6 examiners in a standard testing protocol for the hands, arms, faces, legs, and feet of 130 subjects. Heavier and lighter filaments of measured force were also included. Results showed a high correlation in responses for two values for the 2.83 filaments in the range specified. On detailed analysis between kits there were some differences for site and age.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

[1]  Judith Bell-Krotoski,et al.  “Pocket filaments” and specifications for the semmes-weinstein monofilaments , 1990 .

[2]  S. Weinstein,et al.  Tactile Sensitivity of the Phalanges , 1962, Perceptual and motor skills.

[3]  V. Mountcastle,et al.  Detection thresholds for stimuli in humans and monkeys: comparison with threshold events in mechanoreceptive afferent nerve fibers innervating the monkey hand. , 1972, Journal of neurophysiology.

[4]  O. L. Zangwill,et al.  Somatosensory Changes after Penetrating Brain Wounds in Man , 1960 .

[5]  A. Dellon The sensational contributions of Erik Moberg. , 1990, Journal of hand surgery.

[6]  S R Hinderer,et al.  Measurement standards for interdisciplinary medical rehabilitation. , 1992, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[7]  E. Fess,et al.  The need for reliability and validity in hand assessment instruments. , 1986, The Journal of hand surgery.

[8]  S Weinstein,et al.  Intensive and extensive aspects of tactile sensitivity as a function of body part, sex, and laterality , 1968 .

[9]  P. Dyck,et al.  Introduction of automated systems to evaluate touch‐pressure, vibration, and thermal cutaneous sensation in man , 1978, Annals of neurology.

[10]  J. Bell-Krotoski A Study of Peripheral Nerve Involvement Underlying Physical Disability of the Hand in Hansen's Disease , 1992 .

[11]  Clinical vs quantitative evaluation of cutaneous sensation. , 1976, Archives of neurology.

[12]  S Weinstein,et al.  Testing sensibility, including touch-pressure, two-point discrimination, point localization, and vibration. , 1993, Journal of hand therapy : official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists.

[13]  K Von Prince,et al.  Measuring sensory function of the hand in peripheral nerve injuries. , 1967, The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association.

[14]  A. Ketenjian,et al.  Studies on the mechanism of callus cartilage differentiation and calcification during fracture healing. , 1978, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[15]  Werner Jl,et al.  Evaluating cutaneous pressure sensation of the hand. , 1970 .

[16]  G. Pearsall,et al.  Von Frey's method of measuring pressure sensibility in the hand: an engineering analysis of the Weinstein-Semmes pressure aesthesiometer. , 1978, The Journal of hand surgery.

[17]  S. Weinstein,et al.  Tactual sensitivity as a function of handedness and laterality. , 1961, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[18]  S. Weinstein Fifty years of somatosensory research , 1993 .

[19]  C. Parry Rehabilitation of the hand , 1973 .

[20]  K. Horch,et al.  An Automated Tactile Tester for evaluation of cutaneous sensibility. , 1992, The Journal of hand surgery.

[21]  J. Bell-Krotoski,et al.  The repeatability of testing with Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments. , 1987, The Journal of hand surgery.

[22]  A J Vendrik,et al.  Detection Theory Applied to the Absolute Sensitivity of Sensory Systems. , 1963, Biophysical journal.

[23]  J. Marshall THE SKIN SENSES , 1969 .

[24]  W L Buford,et al.  The force/time relationship of clinically used sensory testing instruments. , 1997, Journal of hand therapy : official journal of the American Society of Hand Therapists.

[25]  J. Waylett-Rendall Sensibility evaluation and rehabilitation. , 1988, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.