首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


Feasibility and repeatability of cold and mechanical quantitative sensory testing in normal dogs
Authors:Jessica D Briley  Morika D Williams  Mila Freire  Emily H Griffith  B Duncan X Lascelles
Institution:1. Comparative Pain Research Laboratory (CPRL), Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606, USA;2. Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27605, USA;3. Center for Comparative Medicine and Translational Research, Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606, USA;4. Department of Clinical Sciences, Surgery Section, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606, USA;1. School of Veterinary Science, The University of Queensland, Gatton Campus, QLD 4343, Australia;2. Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 UPM Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia;1. Danish Dementia Research Centre, Department of Neurology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark;2. Multidisciplinary Pain Center, Neuroscience Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark;3. Department of Anaesthesia, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark;4. Danish Pain Research Center, Department of Neurology, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark;5. Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark
Abstract:Feasibility and inter-session repeatability of cold and mechanical quantitative sensory testing (QST) were assessed in 24 normal dogs. Cold thermal latencies were evaluated using a thermal probe (0 °C) applied to three pelvic limb sites. Mechanical thresholds were measured using an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer (EVF) and a blunt-probed pressure algometer (PA) applied to the dorsal aspect of the metatarsus. All QST trials were performed with dogs in lateral recumbency. Collection of cold QST data was easy (feasible) in 19/24 (79%) dogs. However, only 18.4%, 18.9% and 13.2% of cold QST trials elicited a response at the medial tibia, third digital pad and plantar metatarsal regions, respectively. Collection of mechanical QST data was easy (feasible) in 20/24 (83%) dogs for both EVF and PA.At consecutive sampling times, approximately 2 weeks apart, the average EVF sensory thresholds were 414 ± 186 g and 379 ± 166 g, respectively, and the average PA sensory thresholds were 1089 ± 414 g and 1028 ± 331 g, respectively. There was no significant difference in inter-session or inter-limb threshold values for either mechanical QST device. The cold QST protocol in this study was achievable, but did not provide consistently quantifiable results. Both mechanical QST devices tested provided repeatable, reliable sensory threshold measurements in normal, client-owned dogs. These findings contribute to the validation of the EVF and PA as tools to obtain repeated QST data over time in dogs to assess somatosensory processing changes.
Keywords:Canine  Quantitative sensory testing  Pressure algometer  Electronic von Frey anesthesiometer
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