title: Thermal discrimination thresholds: a comparison of different methods.
abstract: Thermal testing was carried out on 55 healthy subjects in order to establish normal results and reproducibility of warm and cold thresholds. Diurnal variations of thresholds were investigated in a further 30 normal subjects. Then the sensitivity of different testing procedures was investigated in 33 patients with diabetes mellitus, but without severe polyneuropathy. Forced choice testing takes 6 times longer than the method of limits, and the results are not considerably different. It is thought that the forced choice algorithm does not provide a method for clinical routine. Another new approach, the double random staircase method, may help to exclude bias without taking too much time.
authors.affiliation: Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, University Hospital, Erlangen, West Germany.
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Claus
authors.forename: M J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Hilz
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Neundörfer
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002940:Circadian Rhythm / Q000502:physiology; D003922:Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 / Q000503:physiopathology; D003924:Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 / Q000503:physiopathology; D003929:Diabetic Neuropathies / Q000503:physiopathology; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012684:Sensory Thresholds / Q000502:physiology; D012867:Skin / Q000294:innervation; D013823:Thermoreceptors / Q000503:physiopathology; D013697:Thermosensing / Q000502:physiology*