Cited by 83Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsPeripheral Neuropathies and Disorders

Does this patient with diabetes have large-fiber peripheral neuropathy?

Kanji, Jamil N.·2010·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Diabetic peripheral neuropathy predisposes patients to foot ulceration that heals poorly and too often leads to amputation. Large-fiber peripheral neuropathy (LFPN), one common form of diabetic neuropathy, when detected early prompts aggressive measures to prevent progression to foot ulceration and its associated morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the literature to determine the clinical examination findings predictive of asymptomatic LFPN before foot ulceration develops. DATA SOURCES, STUDY SELECTION, AND DATA EXTRACTION: MEDLINE (January 1966-November 2009) and EMBASE (1980-2009 [week 50]) databases were searched for articles on bedside diagnosis of diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Included studies compared elements of history or physical examination with nerve conduction testing as the reference standard. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 1388 articles, 9 on diagnostic accuracy and 3 on precision met inclusion criteria. The prevalence of diabetic LFPN ranged from 23% to 79%. A score greater than 4 on a symptom questionnaire developed by the Italian Society of Diabetology increases the likelihood of LFPN (likelihood ratio [LR], 4.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9-5.6; negative LR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.10-0.38). The most useful examination findings were vibration perception with a 128-Hz tuning fork (LR range, 16-35) and pressure sensation with a 5.07 Semmes-Weinstein monofilament (LR range, 11-16). Normal results on vibration testing (LR range, 0.33-0.51) or monofilament (LR range, 0.09-0.54) make LFPN less likely. Combinations of signs did not perform better than these 2 individual findings. CONCLUSIONS: Physical examination is most useful in evaluating for LFPN in patients with diabetes. Abnormal results on monofilament testing and vibratory perception (alone or in combination with the appearance of the feet, ulceration, and ankle reflexes) are the most helpful signs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2010.428

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the absence of this equipment, the Ipswich Touch Test is an acceptable alternative (likelihood ratio range, 10-15).

    “In the absence of this equipment, the Ipswich Touch Test is an acceptable alternative that can be used to evaluate whether a patient can perceive light touch from an examiner's index finger applied to 6 or 8 prespecified sites on the feet (likelihood ratio range, 10-15).26”

    From Diabetic Foot Ulcers (2023) · cites this paper as [26]

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 34 · Cited by 83

Authors
Kanji, J. N.
Affiliations
McMaster University (CA)
Corresponding author
Kanji, Jamil N.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2010-04-21
Volume
303
Issue
15
Pages
1526
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W1982647766
Cited by
83
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
FWCI
4.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Peripheral Neuropathies and Disorders
Keywords
diabetic peripheral neuropathy, foot ulcer, amputation prevention, bedside diagnosis, vibration perception, Semmes-Weinstein monofilament, pressure sensation, physical examination findings, diagnostic accuracy, likelihood ratios
MeSH terms
Diabetic Neuropathies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Neurologic Examination, Physical Examination, Foot Ulcer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review