Measurement precision of a portable instrument to assess vibrotactile perception threshold

  • Benoît Frenette
  • Donna Mergler
  • Jocelyne Ferraris


The objective of the present study was to evaluate the reliability of a modified version of the commercially available Biothesiometer, and to examine vibrotactile perception thresholds with respect to age and gender. A standardized protocol for measuring vibrotactile perception threshold was administered to 80 subjects, once a week over 4 weeks. Inter-session variability was stable (analysis of variance for repeated measures; P>0.05) and correlations were high (Pearson's: 0.87≤r≤0.90; P≤0.001). For sites on both hands and feet, there was a significant increase with age (0.19≤r2≤0.52; P≤0.001). Five factor analysis of variance model showed that vibrotactile perception threshold was significantly different with stimulus site, age category and gender; no differences were observed with alcohol consumption or smoking status. The findings indicate that the measurements from this device are highly reproducible and sensitive to expected threshold differences with age and gender. The authors attribute this to technical improvements of the original apparatus, rigid adherence to test protocol and maintenance of standard conditions. This type of instrument would be useful in assessing vibrotactile perception loss in occupational health studies.

Key words

Vibrotactile perception threshold Peripheral nerve disease Physical stimulation Biothesiometer 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arezzo JC, Schaumburg HH (1980) The use of the Optacon as a screening device. J Occup Med 22:461–464Google Scholar
  2. Arezzo J, Laudadio C, Schaumburg HH (1984) The optacon tactile tester and the Pfizer thermal tester: new devices for the detection of diabetic neuropathy. Diabetes 33 [Suppl]:185AGoogle Scholar
  3. Arezzo JC, Schaumburg HH, Laudadio C (1985) The Vibratron: a simple device for quantitative evaluation of tactile-vibratory sense. Neurology 35:169Google Scholar
  4. Axelson O, Hogstedt C (1988) On the health effects of solvents. In: Zenz C (ed) Occupational medicine. Principles and practical applications, 2nd edn. Ryan/Kelly, Chicago, pp 775–784Google Scholar
  5. Bertelsmann FW, Heimans JJ, Van Rooy JCGM, Heine RJ, Van Der Veen EA (1986) Reproducibility of vibratory perception in patients with diabetic neuropathy. Diabetes Res 3:463–466Google Scholar
  6. Blooms S, Till S, Sönksen P, Smith S (1984) Use of a biothesiometer to measure individual vibration thresholds and their variation in 519 non-diabetic subjects. Br Med J 288:1793–1795Google Scholar
  7. Bove F, Litwak MS, Arezzo JC, Baker EL (1986) Quantitative sensory testing in occupational medicine. Semin Occup Med 1:185–189Google Scholar
  8. Brammer AJ, Piercy JE, Auger PL, Nohara S (1987) Tactile perception in hands occupationally exposed to vibration. J Hand Surg [Am] 12:870–875Google Scholar
  9. Dyck PJ, Zimmerman IR, O'Brien PC, Ness A, Caskey PE, Karnes J, Buslek W (1978) Introduction of automated systems to evaluate touch-pressure, vibration, and thermal cutaneous sensation in man. Ann Neurol 4:502–510Google Scholar
  10. Eisen EA, Letz RE, Wegman DH (1988) Measurement precision for 3 effort dependant neurobehavioural tests. In: Hogstedt C, Reuterwall C (eds) Progress in occupational epidemiology. Excerpta Med Int Cong Ser 829:249–252Google Scholar
  11. Eloffson S, Gamberale F, Hindmarsh T (1980) A cross-sectional epidemiologic investigation on occupationally exposed car and industrial spray painters with special reference to the nervous system. Scand J Work Environ Health 6:239–273Google Scholar
  12. Era P, Jokela J, Suominen H, Heikkinen E (1986) Correlates of vibrotactile thresholds in men of different ages. Acta Neurol Scand 74:210–217Google Scholar
  13. Erkelens DW, Spijker AJ (1984) Objective assessment of vibration perception at the thumb for early diagnosis and follow-up of sensory neuropathy. Diabetologia 27:272A-273AGoogle Scholar
  14. Fengsheng HE (1985) Occupational toxic neuropathies- an update. Scand J Work Environ Health 11:321–330Google Scholar
  15. Freeman B, Rowe M (1981) The effect of sympathetic nerve stimulation on responses of cutaneous Pacinian corpuscles in the cat. Neurosci Lett 22:145–150Google Scholar
  16. Frohring WO, Kohn PM, Bosma JF, Toomey JA (1945) Changes in the vibratory sense of patients with poliomyelitis as measured by the pallethesiometer. Am J Dis Child 69:89–91Google Scholar
  17. Gerr FE, Letz R (1988) Reliability of a widely used test of peripheral cutaneous vibration sensitivity and a comparison of two testing protocols. Br J Ind Med 45:635–639Google Scholar
  18. Goldberg JM, Lindblom U (1979) Standardized method of determining vibratory perception thresholds for diagnosis and screening in neurological investigation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 42:793–803Google Scholar
  19. Gregerson P, Angelso B, Nielson TE, Norgaard B, Uldal C (1984) Neurotoxic effects of organic solvents in exposed workers: an occupational, neuropsychological and neurological investigation. Am J Ind Med 5:201–225Google Scholar
  20. Häkkinen VK, Saarnio I, Ignatius J (1983) A microprocessorbased vibrometer for clinical research. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 56:95Google Scholar
  21. Halar EM, Hammond MC, LaCava EC, Camann C, Ward J (1987) Sensory perception threshold measurement: an evaluation of semi-objective testing devices. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 68:499–507Google Scholar
  22. Halonen P (1986) Quantitative vibration perception threshold in healthy subjects of working age. Eur J Appl Physiol 54:647–655Google Scholar
  23. Halonen P, Halonen JP, Lang HA, Karskela V (1986) Vibratory perception thresholds in shipyard workers exposed to solvents. Acta Neurol Scand 73:561–565Google Scholar
  24. Hockaday TDR, Holman RR, Hillson RM, Pim B, Smith B (1981) Comparison of vibration sense by biothesiometer and fasting glucose values during 3 years of diabetes. Diabetologia 20:670Google Scholar
  25. Husman K, Karli P (1980) Clinical neurological findings among car painters exposed to a mixture of organic solvents. Scand J Work Environ Health 6:33–39Google Scholar
  26. Johnson B (1987) Prevention of neurotoxic illness in working population. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  27. Katims JJ, Naviasky EH, Ng LKY, Rendell M, Bleecker ML (1986) New screening device for assessment of peripheral neuropathy. J Occup Med 28:1219–1221Google Scholar
  28. Knave B, Persson H, Goldberg M (1976) Long-term exposure to jet fuel. An investigation on occupationally exposed workers with special reference to the nervous system. Scand J Work Environ Health 2:152–164Google Scholar
  29. Lowenthal LM, Hockaday TD (1987) Vibration sensory thresholds depend on pressure of applied stimulus. Diabetes Care 10:100–102Google Scholar
  30. Lundborg G, Sollerman C, Stromberg T, Pyykkö I, Rosén B (1987) A new principle for assessing vibrotactile sense in vibration-induced neuropathy. Scand J Work Environ Health 13:375–379Google Scholar
  31. Lundström R (1984) Vibrotactile sensitivity of the human hand's glabrous skin. J Low Freq Noise Vib 3:88–94Google Scholar
  32. Maizlish NA, Fine LJ, Albers JW, Whitehead L, Langolf GD (1987) A neurological evaluation of workers exposed to mixtures of organic solvents. Br J Ind Med 44:14–25Google Scholar
  33. Mergler D, Blain L, Lemaire J, Lalande F (1988) Colour vision impairment and alcohol consumption. Neurotoxicol Teratol 10:255–260Google Scholar
  34. Muijser H, Hooisma J, Hoogendijk EMG, Twisk DAM (1986) Vibration sensitivity as a parameter for detecting peripheral neuropathy I. Results in healthy workers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 58:287–299Google Scholar
  35. Najemnik C, Kritz H, Irsigler K (1984) Biothesiometry: a diagnostic tool for diabetic neuropathy. Diabetologia 27:314AGoogle Scholar
  36. Pearson GHI (1928) Effect of age on vibratory sensitivity. Arch Neurol Psychiatry 20:482–496Google Scholar
  37. Perret E, Regli F (1970) Age and the perceptual threshold for vibratory stimuli. Eur Neurol 4:65–76Google Scholar
  38. Roland E, Nielson VK (1980) Vibratory thresholds in the hands. Comparison of patients with suprathalamic lesions with normal subjects. Arch Neurol 37:775–779Google Scholar
  39. Sallé HJ, Verberk MM (1984) Comparison of five methods for measurement of vibratory perception. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 53:303–309Google Scholar
  40. Seppalainen AM (1986) Solvents and peripheral neuropathy. Prog Clin Biol Res 220:247–253Google Scholar
  41. Spencer PS, Schaumburg HH, Raleigh RL, Terhaar CJ (1975) Nervous system degeneration produced by the industrial solvent methyl-n-butyl ketone. Arch Neurol 32:219–222Google Scholar
  42. Spencer PS, Path MRC, Schaumburg H (1985) Organic solvent neurotoxicity. Facts and research needs. Scand J Work Environ Health 11 [Suppl 1]:53–60Google Scholar
  43. Steiness IB (1958) Biothesiometry in the diagnosis of lumbar disk protrusion. Neurology 8:793–795Google Scholar
  44. Szabo RM, Gelberman RH, Williamson RV, Dellon AL, Yaru NC, Dimick MP (1984) Vibratory sensory testing in acute peripheral nerve compression. J Hand Surg [Am] 9:104–109Google Scholar
  45. Verberk MM, Sallé HJA, Kempers O (1985) Vibratory and tactile sense of the fingers after working with sanders. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 56:217–223Google Scholar
  46. Verrillo RT (1979) Change in vibrotactile thresholds as a function of age. Sensory Processes 3:49–59Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Benoît Frenette
    • 1
  • Donna Mergler
    • 1
  • Jocelyne Ferraris
    • 1
  1. 1.Groupe de Recherche-Action en Biologie du TravailUniversity of QuebecMontréalCanada

Personalised recommendations