Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Arch Plast Surg 2022; 49(03): 427-439
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1748658
Hand/Peripheral Nerve
Review Article

Clinical Assessment of Pain and Sensory Function in Peripheral Nerve Injury and Recovery: A Systematic Review of Literature

Albin A. John 
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, Texas
,
Stephen Rossettie 
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, Texas
,
John Rafael 
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, Texas
,
Cameron T. Cox 
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, Texas
,
Ivica Ducic 
2   Washington Nerve Institute, McLean, Virginia
,
Brendan J. Mackay 
1   Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, Texas
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Peripheral nerve injuries (PNIs) often present with variable symptoms, making them difficult to diagnose, treat, and monitor. When neurologic compromise is inadequately assessed, suboptimal treatment decisions can result in lasting functional deficits. There are many available tools for evaluating pain and functional status of peripheral nerves. However, the literature lacks a detailed, comprehensive view of the data comparing the clinical utility of these modalities, and there is no consensus on the optimal algorithm for sensory and pain assessment in PNIs. We performed a systematic review of the literature focused on clinical data, evaluating pain and sensory assessment methods in peripheral nerves. We searched through multiple databases, including PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar, to identify studies that assessed assessment tools and explored their advantages and disadvantages. A total of 66 studies were selected that assessed various tools used to assess patient's pain and sensory recovery after a PNI. This review may serve as a guide to select the most appropriate assessment tools for monitoring nerve pain and/or sensory function both pre- and postoperatively. As the surgeons work to improve treatments for PNI and dysfunction, identifying the most appropriate existing measures of success and future directions for improved algorithms could lead to improved patient outcomes.

Keywords

peripheral nerve injuries - peripheral nerves - recovery of function - treatment outcomes - sensation

Author Contributions

A.A.J.: conceptualization, investigation, project administration, and manuscript preparation. S.R.: investigation, and manuscript preparation. J.R.: investigation, and manuscript preparation. C.T.C: conceptualization, project administration, and manuscript preparation. I.D.: supervision and validation. B.J.M.: conceptualization and validation.




Publication History

Article published online:
27 May 2022

© 2022. The Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Papatheodorou LK, Williams BG, Sotereanos DG. Preliminary results of recurrent cubital tunnel syndrome treated with neurolysis and porcine extracellular matrix nerve wrap. J Hand Surg Am 2015; 40 (05) 987-992
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Gaspar MP, Abdelfattah HM, Welch IW, Vosbikian MM, Kane PM, Rekant MS. Recurrent cubital tunnel syndrome treated with revision neurolysis and amniotic membrane nerve wrapping. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2016; 25 (12) 2057-2065
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Tos P, Crosio A, Pugliese P, Adani R, Toia F, Artiaco S. Painful scar neuropathy: principles of diagnosis and treatment. Plast Aesthet Res. 2015; 2: 156-164
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bogle A, Wiesler E. Neuritis of the cutaneous nerves of the hand. J Hand Surg Am 2014; 39 (06) 1204-1206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Stassart RM, Fledrich R, Velanac V. et al. A role for Schwann cell-derived neuregulin-1 in remyelination. Nat Neurosci 2013; 16 (01) 48-54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Menorca RMG, Fussell TS, Elfar JC. Nerve physiology: mechanisms of injury and recovery. Hand Clin 2013; 29 (03) 317-330
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Baltodano PA, Tong AJ, Chhabra A, Rosson GD. The role of magnetic resonance neurography in the postoperative management of peripheral nerve injuries. Neuroimaging Clin N Am 2014; 24 (01) 235-244
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Martín Noguerol T, Barousse R, Gómez Cabrera M, Socolovsky M, Bencardino JT, Luna A. Functional MR neurography in evaluation of peripheral nerve trauma and postsurgical assessment. Radiographics 2019; 39 (02) 427-446
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Alvites R, Rita Caseiro A, Santos Pedrosa S. et al. Peripheral nerve injury and axonotmesis: State of the art and recent advances. Cogent Med 2018; 5 (01) 1466404
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg 2021; 88: 105906
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Wellnitz SA, Lesniak DR, Gerling GJ, Lumpkin EA. The regularity of sustained firing reveals two populations of slowly adapting touch receptors in mouse hairy skin. J Neurophysiol 2010; 103 (06) 3378-3388
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Novak CB, von der Heyde RL. Evidence and techniques in rehabilitation following nerve injuries. Hand Clin 2013; 29 (03) 383-392
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Novak CB, Anastakis DJ, Beaton DE, Katz J. Patient-reported outcome after peripheral nerve injury. J Hand Surg Am 2009; 34 (02) 281-287
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Rivera JC, Glebus GP, Cho MS. Disability following combat-sustained nerve injury of the upper limb. Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B (02) 254-258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Novak CB, Anastakis DJ, Beaton DE, Mackinnon SE, Katz J. Relationships among pain disability, pain intensity, illness intrusiveness, and upper extremity disability in patients with traumatic peripheral nerve injury. J Hand Surg Am 2010; 35 (10) 1633-1639
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Ring D. Symptoms and disability after major peripheral nerve injury. Hand Clin 2013; 29 (03) 421-425
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Wang Y, Sunitha M, Chung KC. How to measure outcomes of peripheral nerve surgery. Hand Clin 2013; 29 (03) 349-361
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Williamson A, Hoggart B. Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs 2005; 14 (07) 798-804
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Hawker GA, Mian S, Kendzerska T, French M. Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011; 63 (Suppl. 11) S240-S252
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Hjermstad MJ, Fayers PM, Haugen DF. et al; European Palliative Care Research Collaborative (EPCRC). Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review. J Pain Symptom Manage 2011; 41 (06) 1073-1093
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Melzack R. The McGill Pain Questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods. Pain 1975; 1 (03) 277-299
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Main CJ. Pain assessment in context: a state of the science review of the McGill pain questionnaire 40 years on. Pain 2016; 157 (07) 1387-1399
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Revicki DA. et al. Development and initial validation of an expanded and revised version of the Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ-2). Pain 2009; 144 (1-2): 35-42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Pollard CA. Preliminary validity study of the pain disability index. Percept Mot Skills 1984; 59 (03) 974
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Tait RC, Chibnall JT, Krause S. The pain disability index: psychometric properties. Pain 1990; 40 (02) 171-182
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Chibnall JT, Tait RC. The pain disability index: factor structure and normative data. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1994; 75 (10) 1082-1086
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Irwin MS, Gilbert SEA, Terenghi G, Smith RW, Green CJ. Cold intolerance following peripheral nerve injury. Natural history and factors predicting severity of symptoms. J Hand Surg [Br] 1997; 22 (03) 308-316
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 MacDermid JC. Measurement of health outcomes following tendon and nerve repair. J Hand Ther 2005; 18 (02) 297-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Irwin MS, Gilbert SEA, Terenghi G, Smith RW, Green CJ. Cold intolerance following peripheral nerve injury. Natural history and factors predicting severity of symptoms. J Hand Surg [Br] 1997; 22 (03) 308-316
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Carlsson IK, Dahlin LB. Self-reported cold sensitivity in patients with traumatic hand injuries or hand-arm vibration syndrome - an eight year follow up. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014; 15 (01) 83
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Ruijs ACJ, Jaquet JB, Daanen HAM, Hovius SER. Cold intolerance of the hand measured by the CISS questionnaire in a normative study population. J Hand Surg [Br] 2006; 31 (05) 533-536
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Davey H, Belcher H. Cold intolerance assessment: a reappraisal. Hand Ther 2014; 19 (02) 40-46
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Fonseca MCR, Elui VMC, Lalone E. et al. Functional, motor, and sensory assessment instruments upon nerve repair in adult hands: systematic review of psychometric properties. Syst Rev 2018; 7 (01) 175
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Carlsson I, Cederlund R, Höglund P, Lundborg G, Rosén B. Hand injuries and cold sensitivity: reliability and validity of cold sensitivity questionnaires. Disabil Rehabil 2008; 30 (25) 1920-1928
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Reeve BB, Hays RD, Bjorner JB. et al; PROMIS Cooperative Group. Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Med Care 2007; 45 (05, Suppl 1): S22-S31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Broderick JE, Schneider S, Junghaenel DU, Schwartz JE, Stone AA. Validity and reliability of patient-reported outcomes measurement information system instruments in osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2013; 65 (10) 1625-1633
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Cella D, Riley W, Stone A. et al; PROMIS Cooperative Group. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63 (11) 1179-1194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Askew RL, Cook KF, Keefe FJ. et al. A PROMIS measure of neuropathic pain quality. Value Health 2016; 19 (05) 623-630
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Amtmann D, Cook KF, Jensen MP. et al. Development of a PROMIS item bank to measure pain interference. Pain 2010; 150 (01) 173-182
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Mioton LM, Dumanian GA, Fracol ME. et al. Benchmarking residual limb pain and phantom limb pain in amputees through a patient-reported outcomes survey. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2020; 8 (07) e2977
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Dumanian GA, Potter BK, Mioton LM. et al. Targeted muscle reinnervation treats neuroma and phantom pain in major limb amputees: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg 2019; 270 (02) 238-246
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Revicki DA, Chen WH, Harnam N. et al. Development and psychometric analysis of the PROMIS pain behavior item bank. Pain 2009; 146 (1,2): 158-169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Cook KF, Dunn W, Griffith JW. et al. Pain assessment using the NIH toolbox. Neurology 2013; 80 (11, Suppl 3): S49-S53
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Cook KF, Jensen SE, Schalet BD. et al. PROMIS measures of pain, fatigue, negative affect, physical function, and social function demonstrated clinical validity across a range of chronic conditions. J Clin Epidemiol 2016; 73: 89-102
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Novak CB, Mackinnon SE. Evaluation of nerve injury and nerve compression in the upper quadrant. J Hand Ther 2005; 18 (02) 230-240
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Wilgis EFS. Techniques for diagnosis of peripheral nerve loss. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1982; x (163) 8-14
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Wilton JP. Lower extremity focused neurologic examination. Clin Podiatr Med Surg 2016; 33 (02) 191-202
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Shimokata H, Kuzuya F. Two-point discrimination test of the skin as an index of sensory aging. Gerontology 1995; 41 (05) 267-272
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Bell-Krotoski J, Weinstein S, Weinstein C. Testing sensibility, including touch-pressure, two-point discrimination, point localization, and vibration. J Hand Ther 1993; 6 (02) 114-123
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Hermann RP, Novak CB, Mackinnon SE. Establishing normal values of moving two-point discrimination in children and adolescents. Dev Med Child Neurol 1996; 38 (03) 255-261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Amirjani N, Ashworth NL, Gordon T, Edwards DC, Chan KM. Normative values and the effects of age, gender, and handedness on the Moberg Pick-Up Test. Muscle Nerve 2007; 35 (06) 788-792
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Martina ISJ, van Koningsveld R, Schmitz PIM, van der Meché FGA, van Doorn PA. Measuring vibration threshold with a graduated tuning fork in normal aging and in patients with polyneuropathy. European Inflammatory Neuropathy Cause and Treatment (INCAT) group. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1998; 65 (05) 743-747
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Claus D, Carvalho VP, Neundörfer B, Blaise JF. Perception of vibration. Normal findings and methodologic aspects [in German]. Nervenarzt 1988; 59 (03) 138-142
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Sun HH, Oswald TM, Sachanandani NS, Borschel GH. The ‘Ten Test’: application and limitations in assessing sensory function in the paediatric hand. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2010; 63 (11) 1849-1852
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Valdes K. Clinical relevance commentary in response to: the sensory function of the uninjured nerve in patients after median and ulnar nerve injury. J Hand Ther 2017; 30 (01) 104-105
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Tong J, Mao O, Goldreich D. Two-point orientation discrimination versus the traditional two-point test for tactile spatial acuity assessment. Front Hum Neurosci 2013; 7: 579
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Shooter D. Use of two-point discrimination as a nerve repair assessment tool: preliminary report. ANZ J Surg 2005; 75 (10) 866-868
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Hsu HY, Kuo LC, Kuan TS. et al. Determining the functional sensibility of the hand in patients with peripheral nerve repair: Feasibility of using a novel manual tactile test for monitoring the progression of nerve regeneration. J Hand Ther 2017; 30 (01) 65-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Ho ES. Evaluation of pediatric upper extremity peripheral nerve injuries. J Hand Ther 2015; 28 (02) 135-142
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Lundborg G, Rosén B. The two-point discrimination test–time for a re-appraisal?. J Hand Surg [Br] 2004; 29 (05) 418-422
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Boldt R, Gogulski J, Gúzman-Lopéz J, Carlson S, Pertovaara A. Two-point tactile discrimination ability is influenced by temporal features of stimulation. Exp Brain Res 2014; 232 (07) 2179-2185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Deslivia MF, Lee H-J, Adikrishna A, Jeon I-H. Decellularized nerves for upper limb nerve reconstruction: a systematic review of functional outcomes. J Reconstr Microsurg 2015; 31 (09) 660-667
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Rosén B, Lundborg G. A new tactile gnosis instrument in sensibility testing. J Hand Ther 1998; 11 (04) 251-257
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Bell-Krotoski JA, Buford Jr WL. The force/time relationship of clinically used sensory testing instruments. J Hand Ther 1997; 10 (04) 297-309
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Fess EE. Human performance: an appropriate measure of instrument reliability?. J Hand Ther 1997; 10 (01) 46-47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Moberg E. The unsolved problem—how to test the functional value of hand sensibility. J Hand Ther 1991; 4 (03) 105-110
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Marlowe ES, Bonner Jr. FJ, Berkowitz AR. Correlation between two-point discrimination and median nerve sensory response. Muscle Nerve 1999; 22 (09) 1196-1200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Jerosch-Herold C. A study of the relative responsiveness of five sensibility tests for assessment of recovery after median nerve injury and repair. J Hand Surg [Br] 2003; 28 (03) 255-260
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Zhang Z, Tannan V, Holden JK, Dennis RG, Tommerdahl M. A quantitative method for determining spatial discriminative capacity. Biomed Eng Online 2008; 7: 12
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Dellon AL, Mackinnon SE, Crosby PM. Reliability of two-point discrimination measurements. J Hand Surg Am 1987; 12 (5, pt. 1): 693-696
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Novak CB, Mackinnon SE, Williams JI, Kelly L. Establishment of reliability in the evaluation of hand sensibility. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993; 92 (02) 311-322
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Bruns P, Camargo CJ, Campanella H, Esteve J, Dinse HR, Röder B. Tactile acuity charts: a reliable measure of spatial acuity. PLoS One 2014; 9 (02) e87384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Rosén B. Recovery of sensory and motor function after nerve repair. A rationale for evaluation. J Hand Ther 1996; 9 (04) 315-327
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Ceynowa M, Mazurek T, Pankowski R, Rocławski M, Treder M. The thermal sensitivity test in evaluating outcome after peripheral nerve injury. BioMed Res Int 2015; 2015: 528356
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 MacDermid JC, Doherty T. Clinical and electrodiagnostic testing of carpal tunnel syndrome: a narrative review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2004; 34 (10) 565-588
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Patel MR, Bassini L. A comparison of five tests for determining hand sensibility. J Reconstr Microsurg 1999; 15 (07) 523-526
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Strauch B, Lang A. The ten test revisited. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 112 (02) 593-594
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Moberg E. Objective methods for determining the functional value of sensibility in the hand. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1958; 40-B (03) 454-476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Omer Jr GE. Sensation and sensibility in the upper extremity. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1974; (104) 30-36
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Dellon AL. Clinical use of vibratory stimuli to evaluate peripheral nerve injury and compression neuropathy. Plast Reconstr Surg 1980; 65 (04) 466-476
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Bear-Lehman J, Abreu BC. Evaluating the hand: issues in reliability and validity. Phys Ther 1989; 69 (12) 1025-1033
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Novak CB, Mackinnon SE, Kelly L. Correlation of two-point discrimination and hand function following median nerve injury. Ann Plast Surg 1993; 31 (06) 495-498
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Lundborg G, Dahlin LB, Lundström R, Necking LE, Strömberg T. Vibrotactile function of the hand in compression and vibration-induced neuropathy. Sensibility index–a new measure. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Hand Surg 1992; 26 (03) 275-279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Strauch B, Lang A, Ferder M, Keyes-Ford M, Freeman K, Newstein D. The ten test. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 99 (04) 1074-1078
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Uddin Z, MacDermid J, Packham T. The ten test for sensation. J Physiother 2013; 59 (02) 132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Jerosch-Herold C. Assessment of sensibility after nerve injury and repair: a systematic review of evidence for validity, reliability and responsiveness of tests. J Hand Surg [Br] 2005; 30 (03) 252-264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Fonseca MCR, Elui VMC, Lalone E. et al. Functional, motor, and sensory assessment instruments upon nerve repair in adult hands: systematic review of psychometric properties. Syst Rev 2018; 7 (01) 175
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 88 Hsu H-Y, Kuo L-C, Jou IM, Chen S-M, Chiu H-Y, Su F-C. Establishment of a proper manual tactile test for hands with sensory deficits. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2013; 94 (03) 451-458
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 89 Guy RJ, Clark CA, Malcolm PN, Watkins PJ. Evaluation of thermal and vibration sensation in diabetic neuropathy. Diabetologia 1985; 28 (03) 131-137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 90 Ingram LA, Butler AA, Walsh LD, Brodie MA, Lord SR, Gandevia SC. The upper limb physiological profile assessment: description, reliability, normative values and criterion validity. PLoS One 2019; 14 (06) e0218553
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar