threshold testing
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

279
(FIVE YEARS 42)

H-INDEX

29
(FIVE YEARS 3)

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Draxler ◽  
Aurora Moen ◽  
Karolina Galek ◽  
Ani Boghos ◽  
Dariga Ramazanova ◽  
...  

In pain patients affective and motivational reactions as well as impairment of daily life activities dominate the clinical picture. In contrast, many rodent pain models have been established on the basis of mechanical hypersensitivity testing. Up to today most rodent studies on pain still rely on reflexive withdrawal responses only. This discrepancy has likely contributed to the low predictive power of preclinical pain models for novel therapies. Here, we used a behavioural test array for rats to behaviourally evaluate five aetiologically distinct pain models consisting of inflammatory-, postsurgical-, cephalic-, neuropathic- and chemotherapy-induced pain. We assessed paralleling clinical expressions and comorbidities of chronic pain with an array of behavioural tests to assess anxiety, social interaction, distress, depression, and voluntary/spontaneous behaviours. Pharmacological treatment of the distinct pain conditions was performed with pathology-specific and clinically efficacious analgesics as gabapentin, sumatriptan, naproxen, and codeine. We found that rats differed in their manifestation of symptoms depending on the pain model and that pathology-specific analgesics also reduced the associated behavioural parameters. Based on all behavioural test performed, we screened for tests that can discriminate experimental groups on the basis of reflexive as well as non-sensory, affective parameters. Together, we propose a set of non-evoked behaviours with a comparable predictive power to mechanical threshold testing for each pain model.


Author(s):  
Lauryn DeGreeff ◽  
Christopher J. Katilie ◽  
Ryan F. Johnson ◽  
Stephanie Vaughan
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kayla M. White ◽  
Caroline Frambach ◽  
John Doan ◽  
Urmi V. Mehta ◽  
Itamar Livnat ◽  
...  

AbstractPurposeCone contrast threshold testing (CCT) provides quantitative measurements of color and contrast function to reveal changes in vision quality that is not a standard endpoint in clinical trials. We utilize CCT to measure visual function in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS), age-related macular degeneration (AMD), epiretinal membrane (ERM), and retinal vein occlusion (RVO).MethodsRetrospective data was gathered from 268 patients of the Gavin Herbert Eye Institute. Subjects included 17 patients with MS, 45 patients with AMD, 41 patients with ERM, 11 patients with RVO, and 123 age and visual acuity-matched healthy controls. Patients underwent the primary measurement outcome, CCT testing, as well as Sloan visual acuity test and spectral domain optical coherence tomography during normal care.ResultsColor and contrast deficits were present in MS patients regardless of history of optic neuritis. AMD with intermediate or worse disease demonstrated reduced CCT scores. All 3 stages of ERM demonstrated cone contrast deficits. Despite restoration of visual acuity, RVO-affected eyes demonstrated poorer CCT performance than unaffected fellow eyes.ConclusionsCCT demonstrates color and contrast deficits for multiple retinal diseases with differing pathophysiology. Further prospective studies of CCT in other disease states and with larger samples sizes is warranted.Brief Summary StatementIn a retrospective analysis of 268 adults, cone contrast threshold testing (CCT) demonstrates patterns of visual function deficits in multiple sclerosis and age-related macular degeneration and similar declines in epiretinal membranes and retinal vein occlusion beyond standard visual acuity. Across all disease states, color and contrast vision were negatively impacted.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 3217
Author(s):  
Gregory Mansella ◽  
Marco Rueegg ◽  
Andreas F. Widmer ◽  
Sarah Tschudin-Sutter ◽  
Manuel Battegay ◽  
...  

This prospective observational study evaluated the safety and feasibility of a low threshold testing process in a Triage and Test Center (TTC) during the early course of the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic. In addition, we aimed to identify clinical predictors for a positive severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) swab result. Patients underwent informal triage, standardized history taking, and physician evaluation, only where indicated. Patients were observed for 30 days. Safety was the primary outcome and was defined as a COVID-19-related 30 day re-presentation rate <5% and mortality rate <1% in patients presenting to the TTC. Feasibility was defined as an overruling of informal triage <5%. Among 4815 presentations, 572 (11.9%) were tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, and 4774 were discharged. Mortality at 30-days was 0.04% (2 patients, one of which related to COVID-19). Fever (OR 2.03 [95% CI 1.70;2.42]), myalgia (OR 1.94 [1.63;2.31]), chills (OR 1.77 [1.44;2.16]), headache (OR 1.61 [1.34;1.94]), cough (OR 1.50 [1.24;1.83]), weakness (OR 1.46 [1.21;1.76]), and confusion (OR 1.39 [1.06;1.80]) were associated with test positivity. Re-presentation rate was 8% overall and 1.4% in COVID-19 related re-presentation (69 of 4774). The overruling rate of informal triage was 1.5%. According to our study, a low-threshold testing process in a TTC appeared to be safe (low re-presentation and low mortality) and is feasible (low overruling of informal triage). A COVID-19 diagnosis based on clinical parameters only does not appear possible.


Author(s):  
Andrius Melninkaitis ◽  
Linas Smalakys ◽  
Egidijus Pupka ◽  
Gintare Batavičiute ◽  
Ruta Pakalnyte ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document