PERFORMANCE OF TWO DIFFERENT CLINICAL SCORING SYSTEMS IN DIAGNOSING DISTAL SENSORY POLYNEUROPATHY IN PATIENTS WITH TYPE-2 DIABETES.
Academic Article
Overview
abstract
BACKGROUND: Early diagnosis of distal peripheral neuropathy (DSPN) the commonest diabetes complications, helps prevent significant morbidity. Clinical parameters are useful for detection, but subjectivity and lack of operator proficiency often results in inaccuracies. Comparative diagnostic accuracy of Diabetic Neuropathy Symptom (DNS) score and Diabetic Neuropathy Examination (DNE) score in detecting DSPN confirmed by nerve conduction studies (NCS) has not been evaluated. This study compares the performance of these scores in predicting the presence of electro physiologically proven DSPN. The objective of this, study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of DNS and DNE scores in detecting NCS proven DSPN in type-2 diabetics, and to determine the frequency of sub-clinical DSPN among type-2 diabetics. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study the DNS score and DNE score were determined in 110 diagnosed type-2 diabetic patients. NCS were carried out and amplitudes, velocities and latencies of sensory and motor nerves in lower limb were recorded. RESULTS: Comparison between the two clinical diagnostic modalities and NCS using Pearson's chi square test showed a significant association between NCS and DNE scores (p-value =.003, specificity 93%). The DNS score performed poorly in comparison (p-value = .068, specificity 77%). When the two scores were taken in combination the specificity in diagnosing DSPN was greater (p-value = .018, specificity 96%) than either alone. 33% of patients had subclinical neuropathy. CONCLUSION: DNE score alone and in combination with DNS score is reliable in predicting DSPN and is more specific than DNS score in evaluating DSPN. Both tests lack sensitivity. Patients without any evidence of clinical neuropathy manifest abnormalities on NCS.
