Validity and Reliability of the Semmes-Weinstein Monofilament Test and the Thumb Localizing Test in Patients With Stroke

Mabu Suda, Michiyuki Kawakami, Kohei Okuyama, Ryota Ishii, Osamu Oshima, Nanako Hijikata, Takuya Nakamura, Asako Oka, Kunitsugu Kondo, Meigen Liu, Mabu Suda, Michiyuki Kawakami, Kohei Okuyama, Ryota Ishii, Osamu Oshima, Nanako Hijikata, Takuya Nakamura, Asako Oka, Kunitsugu Kondo, Meigen Liu

Abstract

Background: Somatosensory impairment is common in patients who have had a stroke and can affect their motor function and activities of daily living (ADL). Therefore, detecting and treating somatosensory impairments properly is considered to be very important, and various examinations have been developed. However, the reliability and validity of few of them have been verified due to differences in the procedure of each examiner or poor quantification by the examination itself. Objective: We hypothesized that, with fixed procedures two convenient clinical examinations, the Semmes-Weinstein Monofilament Test (SWMT) and the Thumb Localizing Test (TLT), could provide reliable assessments of light touch sensation and proprioception. The purpose of this study was to verify the reliability and validity of these two examinations as indices of somatosensory impairment of the upper extremity (UE) in patients with chronic post-stroke hemiparesis. Methods: Fifty patients with chronic stroke (median time after onset of stroke, 848 [474-1708] days, mean age 57 [standard deviation 14] years) were enrolled at Keio University Hospital from 2017 to 2018. Examiners learned the original method of the SWMT and the TLT rigorously and shared it with each other. The TLT procedure was partially modified by dividing the location of the patient's thumb into four spaces. Two examiners evaluated the SWMT and the TLT for 2 days, and intra-rater and inter-rater reliabilities were calculated using weighted kappa statistics. In addition to this, the evaluator size score of the SWMT was assessed with Bland-Altman analysis to evaluate systematic bias. The Stroke Impairment Assessment Set (SIAS) sensory items were used to assess validity, and Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were calculated. Results: Intra/inter-rater agreements of the SWMT grade score were 0.89 (thumb, 95%CI: 0.83-0.95)/ 0.75 (0.60-0.91) and 0.80 (index finger, 0.67-0.93)/0.79 (0.66-0.92), and of the TLT they were 0.83 (navel level proximal space, 0.71-0.95)/ 0.83 (0.73-0.92), 0.90 (navel level distal space, 0.85-0.96)/ 0.80 (0.69-0.90), 0.80 (shoulder level proximal space, 0.68-0.92)/ 0.77 (0.65-0.89), and 0.87 (shoulder level distal space, 0.80-0.93)/ 0.80 (0.68-0.92) (P < 0.001, each item). All of them showed substantial agreement, but the MDC of the SWMT evaluator size was 1.28 to 1.79 in the inter-rater test and 1.94-2.06 in the intra-rater test. The SWMT grade score showed a strong correlation with the SIAS light touch sensation item (r = 0.65, p < 0.001), as did the TLT with the SIAS position sense item (r = -0.70-0.62, p < 0.001 each space). Conclusions: The reliability and validity of the SWMT and the TLT were verified. These tests can be used as reliable sensory examinations of the UE in patients with chronic stroke, and especially for the SWMT, it is more reliable for screening.

Keywords: Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test; assessment; rehabilitation; somatosensory disorders; stroke; thumb localizing test.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Copyright © 2021 Suda, Kawakami, Okuyama, Ishii, Oshima, Hijikata, Nakamura, Oka, Kondo and Liu.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Thumb Localizing Test (TLT). (A) positioning of the paretic UE by the examiner. (B) four spaces in which the paretic UE is placed. Distal spaces are not far from the trunk because the reaching limb should be able to reach them without difficulty. (C) rating of positive results. 1 degree, Once the thumb and index finger of the reaching limb reached several centimeters away from the tip of the thumb of the fixed limb then found themselves not reached to the tip. After that, they make a course correction and finally reach the tip. It is also rated 1 degree if the course of the reaching limb was not linear though the reaching limb could reach to the tip at one time. 2 degrees, The thumb and index finger of the reaching limb reach a place more than a several centimeters from the tip of the thumb of the fixed limb, and move in the air searching for the thumb. Or they accidentally hit the thumb or other fingers of the fixed limb and reach the tip of the thumb tracing over the skin. It is also the case that the patient succeeds in the procedure by moving the thumb of the fixed limb even though he or she was instructed not to do that. 3 degrees, The reaching limb hits the forearm of the fixed limb and reaches the thumb tracing over the skin or the reaching limb moves in the air without finding the thumb and finally the patient abandons the test.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Bland-Altman plot of the evaluator size of the Semmes-Weinstein Monofilament Test. The solid line represents the mean difference. The dashed line represents the upper and lower limits of agreements of the difference.

References

    1. Doyle S, Bennett S, Fasoli SE, McKenna KT. Interventions for sensory impairment in the upper limb after stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (2010) 6:CD00631. 10.1002/14651858.CD006331.pub2
    1. Klingner CM, Witte OW, Günther A. Sensory syndromes. Front Neurol Neurosci. (2012) 30:4–8. 10.1159/000333373
    1. Kim JS, Choi-Kwon S. Discriminative sensory dysfunction after unilateral stroke. Stroke. (1996) 27:677–82. 10.1161/01.STR.27.4.677
    1. Carey LM. Somatosensory loss after stroke. Crit Rev Phys Rehabil Med. (1995) 7:51–91. 10.1615/CritRevPhysRehabilMed.v7.i1.40
    1. de Weerdt W, Lincoln NB, Harrison MA. Prediction of arm and hand function recovery in stroke patients. Int J Rehabil Res. (1987) 10:110–2. 10.1097/00004356-198712005-00022
    1. Kusoffsky A, Wadell I, Nilsson BY. The relationship between sensory impairment and motor recovery in patients with hemiplegia. Scand J Rehabil Med. (1982) 14:27–32.
    1. Konczak J, Corcos DM, Horak F, Poizner H, Shapiro M, Tuite P, et al. . Proprioception and motor control in Parkinson's disease. J Mot Behav. (2009) 41:543–52. 10.3200/35-09-002
    1. Turville M, Carey LM, Matyas TA, Blennerhassett J. Change in functional arm use is associated with somatosensory skills after sensory retraining poststroke. Am. J. Occup. Ther. (2017) 71:7103190070. 10.5014/ajot.2017.024950
    1. Connell LA, Lincoln NB, Radford KA. Somatosensory impairment after stroke: frequency of different deficits and their recovery. Clin Rehabil. (2008) 22:758–67. 10.1177/0269215508090674
    1. Patel AT, Duncan PW, Lai SM, Studenski S. The relation between impairments and functional outcomes poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. (2000) 81:1357–63. 10.1053/apmr.2000.9397
    1. Sarlegna FR, Sainburg RL. The roles of vision and proprioception in the planning of reaching movements. Adv Exp Med Biol. (2009) 629:317–35. 10.1007/978-0-387-77064-2_16
    1. Carey LM, Matyas T, Baum C. Effects of somatosensory impairment on participation after stroke. Am J Occup Ther. (2018) 72:1–10. 10.5014/ajot.2018.025114
    1. Kessner SS, Schlemm E, Cheng B, Bingel U, Fiehler J, Gerloff C, et al. . Somatosensory deficits after ischemic stroke. Stroke. (2019) 50:1116–23. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.118.023750
    1. Semrau JA, Herter TM, Scott SH, Dukelow SP. Examining differences in patterns of sensory and motor recovery after stroke with robotics. Stroke. (2015) 46:3459–69. 10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.010750
    1. Lincoln NB, Crow JL, Jackson JM, Waters GR, Adams SA, Hodgson P. The unreliability of sensory assessments. Clin Rehabil. (1991) 5:273–82. 10.1177/026921559100500403
    1. Gilman S. Joint position sense and vibration sense: anatomical organisation and assessment. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. (2002) 73:473–7. 10.1136/jnnp.73.5.473
    1. Carey LM, Matyas TA, Oke LE. Evaluation of impaired fingertip texture discrimination and wrist position sense in patients affected by stroke: comparison of clinical and new quantitative measures. J Hand Ther. (2002) 15:71–82. 10.1053/hanthe.2002.v15.01571
    1. Kessner SS, Bingel U, Thomalla G. Somatosensory deficits after stroke: a scoping review. Top Stroke Rehabil. (2016) 23:136–46. 10.1080/10749357.2015.1116822
    1. Yekutiel M, Guttman E. A controlled trial of the retraining of the sensory function of the hand in stroke patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. (1993) 56:241–4. 10.1136/jnnp.56.3.241
    1. Ekstrand E, Lexell J, Brogardh C. Test-retest reliability of the Shape/Texture Identification test in people with chronic stroke. Clin Rehabil. (2016) 30:1120–7. 10.1177/0269215515608512
    1. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jääskö L, Leyman I, Olsson S, Steglind S. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient, 1. A method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med. (1975) 7:13–31.
    1. Lincoln NB, Jackson JM, Adams SA. Reliability and revision of the Nottingham Sensory Assessment for stroke patients. Physiotherapy. (1998) 84:358–65. 10.1016/S0031-9406(05)61454-X
    1. Stolk-Hornsveld F, Crow JL, Hendriks EP, van der Baan R, Harmeling-van der Wel BC. The Erasmus MC modifications to the (revised) Nottingham Sensory Assessment: a reliable somatosensory assessment mea- sure for patients with intracranial disorders. Clin Rehabil. (2006) 20:160–72. 10.1191/0269215506cr932oa
    1. Winward CE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. The Rivermead Assessment of Somatosensory Performance (RASP): standardisation and reliability data. Clin Rehabil. (2002) 16:523–33. 10.1191/0269215502cr522oa
    1. Chong PS, Cros DP. Technology literature review: quantitative sensory testing. Muscle Nerve. (2004) 29:734–47. 10.1002/mus.20053
    1. Connell LA, Tyson SF. Measures of sensation in neurological conditions: a systematic review. Clin Rehabili. (2011) 26:68–80. 10.1177/0269215511412982
    1. Lin JH, Hsueh IP, Sheu CF, Hsieh CL. Psychometric properties of the sensory scale of the Fugl-Meyer assessment in stroke patients, Clin Rehabil. (2004) 18:391–7. 10.1191/0269215504cr737oa
    1. Pumpa LU, Cahill LS, Carey LM. Somatosensory assessment and treatment after stroke: an evidence-practice gap. Aust Occup Ther J. (2015) 62:93–104. 10.1111/1440-1630.12170
    1. Winward CE, Halligan PW, Wade DT. Current practice and clinical relevance of somatosensory assessment after stroke. Clin Rehabil. (1999) 13:48–55. 10.1191/026921599701532126
    1. Weinstein S. Fifty years of somatosensory research: from the Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments to the Weinstein Enhanced Sensory Test [discussion 50]. J Hand Therapy. (1993) 6:11–22. 10.1016/S0894-1130(12)80176-1
    1. Hirayama K, Fukutake T, Kawamura M. ‘Thumb localizing test' for detecting a lesion in the posterior column– medial lemniscal system. J Neurol Sci. (1999) 167:45–9. 10.1016/S0022-510X(99)00136-7
    1. Raji P, Ansari NN, Naghdi S, Forogh B, Hasson S. Relationship between Semmes-Weinstein Monofilaments perception Test and sensory nerve conduction studies in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. NeuroRehabilitation. (2014) 35:543–52. 10.3233/NRE-141150
    1. Mayfield JA, Sugarman JR. The use of the Semmes-Weinstein monofilament and other threshold tests for preventing foot ulceration and amputation in persons with diabetes. J Fam Pract. (2000) 49:S17–29.
    1. Carlsson H, Rosén B, Pessah-Rasmussen H, Björkman A, Brogårdh C. SENSory re-learning of the UPPer limb after stroke (SENSUPP): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial. Trials. (2018) 19:229. 10.1186/s13063-018-2628-1
    1. Rafiei MH, Kelly KM, Borstad AL, Adeli H, Gauthier LV. Predicting improved daily use of the more affected arm poststroke following constraint-induced movement therapy. Phys Ther. (2019) 99:1667–78. 10.1093/ptj/pzz121
    1. Hirayama K, Fukutake T, Kawamura M. Thumb localizing test: examination for disturbance of articular localization. Clin Neurol Rinsho Shinkeigaku (Tokyo). (1986) 26:448–54.
    1. Fujiwara T, Kasashima Y, Honaga K, Muraoka Y, Tsuji T, Osu R, et al. . Motor improvement and corticospinal modulation induced by hybrid assistive neuromuscular dynamic stimulation (HANDS) therapy in patients with chronic stroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. (2009) 23:125–32. 10.1177/1545968308321777
    1. Okuyama K, Ogura M, Kawakami M, Tsujimoto K, Okada K, Miwa K, et al. . Effect of the combination of motor imagery and electrical stimulation on upper extremity motor function in patients with chronic stroke: preliminary results. Ther Adv Neurol Disord. (2018) 11:1–10. 10.1177/1756286418804785
    1. Mizuno K, Abe T, Ushiba J, Kawakami M, Ohwa T, Hagimura K, et al. . Evaluating the effectiveness and safety of the electroencephalogram-based brain-machine interface rehabilitation system for patients with severe hemiparetic stroke: protocol for a randomized controlled trial (BEST-BRAIN Trial). JMIR Res Protoc. (2018) 7:e12339. 10.2196/12339
    1. University Hospital Medical Information Network UMIN-Clinical Trial Registry. Available online at: (accessed June 30, 2020).
    1. Sonoda S. Reliability and validity of Stroke Impairment Assessment Set (SIAS)(2); The items comprise the trunk, higher cortical function, and sensory function and effectiveness as outcome predictor. Jpn J Rehabil Med. (1995) 32:123–32. 10.2490/jjrm1963.32.123
    1. Chino N, Sonoda S, Domen K, Saitoh E, Kimura A. Stroke Impairment Assessment Set (SIAS). In: Chino N, Melvin JL, editors. The Functional Evaluation of Stroke Patients. Tokyo: Springer-Verlag; (1995). p. 19–31. 10.1007/978-4-431-68461-9_3
    1. Bohannon RW, Smith MB. Interrater reliability of a modified ashworth scale of muscle spasticity. Phys Ther. (1987) 67:206–7. 10.1093/ptj/67.2.206
    1. Schreuders TA, Selles RW, van Ginneken BT, Janssen WG, Stam HJ. Sensory evaluation of the hands in patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments. J Hand Ther. (2008) 21:28–34. 10.1197/j.jht.2007.07.020
    1. Fukutake T, Kuwabara S, Kaneko M, Kojima S, Hattori T. Sensory impairments in spinal multiple sclerosis: a combined clinical, magnetic resonance imaging and somatosensory evoked potential study. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. (1998) 100:199–204. 10.1016/S0303-8467(98)00045-6
    1. Tsuji T, Liu M, Sonoda S, Domen K, Chino N. The stroke impairment assessment set: its internal consistency and predictive validity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. (2000) 81:863–8. 10.1053/apmr.2000.6275
    1. Magaziner J, Simonsick EM, Kashner TM, Hebel JR. Patient-proxy response comparability on measures of patient health and functional status. J Clin Epidemiol. (1988) 41:1065–74. 10.1016/0895-4356(88)90076-5
    1. Ludbrook J. Confidence in Altman-Bland plots: a critical review of the method of differences. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. (2010) 37:143–9. 10.1111/j.1440-1681.2009.05288.x
    1. Gust L, D'Journo XB. The use of correlation functions in thoracic surgery research. J Thorac Dis. (2015) 7:E11–5. 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2015.01.54
    1. Hillier S, Immink M, Thewlis D. Assessing proprioception: a systematic review of possibilities. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. (2015) 29:933–49. 10.1177/1545968315573055
    1. Rand D, Tamar Weiss PL, Gottlieb D. Does proprioceptive loss influence recovery of the upper extremity after stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. (1999) 13:15–21. 10.1177/154596839901300104
    1. Findlater SE, Dukelow SP. Upper extremity proprioception after stroke: bridging the gap between neu- roscience and rehabilitation. J Mot Behav. (2017) 49:27–34. 10.1080/00222895.2016.1219303
    1. Rand D. Proprioception deficits in chronic stroke-upper extremity function and daily living. PLoS ONE. (2018) 13:e0195043. 10.1371/journal.pone.0195043
    1. Byl N, Pitsch EA, Abrams GM. Functional outcomes can vary by dose: learning-based sensorimotor training for patients stable poststroke. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. (2008) 22:494–504. 10.1177/1545968308317431
    1. Tashiro S, Mizuno K, Kawakami M, Takahashi O, Nakamura T, Suda M, et al. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation-enhanced rehabilitation is associated with not only motor but also somatosensory cortical plasticity in chronic stroke patients: an interventional study. Ther Adv Chronic Dis. (2019) 10:2040622319889259 10.1177/2040622319889259

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnere