Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Intraoral QST – Mission impossible or not?

Intraoral QST – Mission impossible or not? In this issue of the Scandinavian Journal of Pain, Moana-Filho and colleagues report on multifactorial assessment of measurement errors related to the reliability of intraoral Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) [1]. First of all, the authors should be applauded for their attempt to move intraoral QST forward by looking at intra-examiner reliability between four examiners in a comprehensive (and impressive) statistical model. The main contribution is that intraoral QST, indeed, is feasible and now with a slightly better understanding of key performance parameters such as intraexaminer reliability with four examiners. The authors argue that the relatively small number of test participants, and the choices only to look at a limited number of a standardized QST modalities and a few test regions are minor concerns and I will tend to agree. Why? Because overall the study will stand as another confirmatory piece of evidence in favour of the clinical applicability of intraoral QST. And that is important to highlight – and to publish.1Intraoral Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) in the Nordic countries and IASPQST has a long tradition and in particular Scandinavian researchers have made important contributions to the field (e.g. [2]). Most noticeably, also intraoral and extraoral QST has been developed http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Scandinavian Journal of Pain de Gruyter

Intraoral QST – Mission impossible or not?

Scandinavian Journal of Pain , Volume 16 (1): 2 – Jul 1, 2017

Loading next page...
1
 
/lp/degruyter/intraoral-qst-mission-impossible-or-not-ZcTR9pvUOQ

References (27)

Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
© 2017 Scandinavian Association for the Study of Pain
ISSN
1877-8860
eISSN
1877-8879
DOI
10.1016/j.sjpain.2017.04.066
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In this issue of the Scandinavian Journal of Pain, Moana-Filho and colleagues report on multifactorial assessment of measurement errors related to the reliability of intraoral Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) [1]. First of all, the authors should be applauded for their attempt to move intraoral QST forward by looking at intra-examiner reliability between four examiners in a comprehensive (and impressive) statistical model. The main contribution is that intraoral QST, indeed, is feasible and now with a slightly better understanding of key performance parameters such as intraexaminer reliability with four examiners. The authors argue that the relatively small number of test participants, and the choices only to look at a limited number of a standardized QST modalities and a few test regions are minor concerns and I will tend to agree. Why? Because overall the study will stand as another confirmatory piece of evidence in favour of the clinical applicability of intraoral QST. And that is important to highlight – and to publish.1Intraoral Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) in the Nordic countries and IASPQST has a long tradition and in particular Scandinavian researchers have made important contributions to the field (e.g. [2]). Most noticeably, also intraoral and extraoral QST has been developed

Journal

Scandinavian Journal of Painde Gruyter

Published: Jul 1, 2017

There are no references for this article.