首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
检索        


A simple plaster for screening for diabetic neuropathy: A diagnostic test accuracy systematic review and meta-analysis
Institution:1. Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Second Medical Department, Aristotle University Thessaloniki, 49 Konstantinoupoleos Street, 54642 Thessaloniki, Greece;2. Harris Manchester College, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3TD, United Kingdom;3. First Department of Propedeutic and Internal Medicine, University of Athens School of Medicine, 17 Ag. Thoma Street, 11527 Athens, Greece;4. Second Medical Department, Aristotle University Thessaloniki, 49 Konstantinoupoleos Street, 54642 Thessaloniki, Greece;1. Luigi Sacco Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, University of Milan, Italy;2. III Division of Infectious Diseases, Luigi Sacco Hospital, ASST Fatebenefratelli Sacco, Milan, Italy;3. Department of Diagnostic Services, Clinical Microbiology, Virology and Bioemergent Diagnostics, Luigi Sacco Hospital, ASST Fatebenefratelli Sacco, Milan, Italy;4. I Division of Infectious Diseases, Luigi Sacco Hospital, ASST Fatebenefratelli Sacco, Milan, Italy
Abstract:ObjectiveNeuropad is an adhesive indicator test applied at the plantar surface of the foot that detects sweating through color change. We examined the diagnostic accuracy of this simple plaster as triage test for screening for clinically relevant diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy in adult outpatients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.Materials/MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Biosis Previews, Web of Science, Scopus and gray literature without date or language restrictions. We pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity, and fitted hierarchical models to produce summary receiver operating characteristic curves. We assessed methodological quality of included studies utilizing the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool.ResultsEighteen studies with 3470 participants met the inclusion criteria. Average sensitivity and specificity were 86% (95% CI 79 to 91) and 65% (95% CI 51 to 76) respectively. Likelihood ratios (LRs) were LR + = 2.44 and LR ? = 0.22. Subgroup analyses per reference standard utilized provided similar estimates. Most studies were at risk of bias for patient selection and use of index or reference test, and had concerns regarding applicability due to patient selection.ConclusionThe adhesive indicator test has reasonable sensitivity and could be used for triage of diabetic neuropathy to rule out foot at risk. Patients who tested positive should be referred to specialized care to establish a definite diagnosis. There is insufficient evidence for effectiveness on patient-important outcomes and cost-effectiveness of implementation in the diagnostic pathway compared with the standard clinical examination.
Keywords:
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号