Swahili
Albanian
Arabic
Armenian
Azerbaijani
Belarusian
Bengali
Bosnian
Catalan
Czech
Danish
Deutsch
Dutch
English
Estonian
Finnish
Français
Greek
Haitian Creole
Hebrew
Hindi
Hungarian
Icelandic
Indonesian
Irish
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Latvian
Lithuanian
Macedonian
Mongolian
Norwegian
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Romanian
Russian
Serbian
Slovak
Slovenian
Spanish
Swahili
Swedish
Turkish
Ukrainian
Vietnamese
Български
中文(简体)
中文(繁體)
Clinical and Translational Allergy 2015

Measurement and interpretation of skin prick test results.

Watumiaji waliosajiliwa tu ndio wanaweza kutafsiri nakala
Ingia / Ingia
Kiungo kimehifadhiwa kwenye clipboard
J P M van der Valk
R Gerth van Wijk
E Hoorn
L Groenendijk
I M Groenendijk
N W de Jong

Maneno muhimu

Kikemikali

BACKGROUND

There are several methods to read skin prick test results in type-I allergy testing. A commonly used method is to characterize the wheal size by its 'average diameter'. A more accurate method is to scan the area of the wheal to calculate the actual size. In both methods, skin prick test (SPT) results can be corrected for histamine-sensitivity of the skin by dividing the results of the allergic reaction by the histamine control. The objectives of this study are to compare different techniques of quantifying SPT results, to determine a cut-off value for a positive SPT for histamine equivalent prick -index (HEP) area, and to study the accuracy of predicting cashew nut reactions in double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) tests with the different SPT methods.

METHODS

Data of 172 children with cashew nut sensitisation were used for the analysis. All patients underwent a DBPCFC with cashew nut. Per patient, the average diameter and scanned area of the wheal size were recorded. In addition, the same data for the histamine-induced wheal were collected for each patient. The accuracy in predicting the outcome of the DBPCFC using four different SPT readings (i.e. average diameter, area, HEP-index diameter, HEP-index area) were compared in a Receiver-Operating Characteristic (ROC) plot.

RESULTS

Characterizing the wheal size by the average diameter method is inaccurate compared to scanning method. A wheal average diameter of 3 mm is generally considered as a positive SPT cut-off value and an equivalent HEP-index area cut-off value of 0.4 was calculated. The four SPT methods yielded a comparable area under the curve (AUC) of 0.84, 0.85, 0.83 and 0.83, respectively. The four methods showed comparable accuracy in predicting cashew nut reactions in a DBPCFC.

CONCLUSIONS

The 'scanned area method' is theoretically more accurate in determining the wheal area than the 'average diameter method' and is recommended in academic research. A HEP-index area of 0.4 is determined as cut-off value for a positive SPT. However, in clinical practice, the 'average diameter method' is also useful, because this method provides similar accuracy in predicting cashew nut allergic reactions in the DBPCFC.

BACKGROUND

Trial number NTR3572.

Jiunge na ukurasa
wetu wa facebook

Hifadhidata kamili ya mimea ya dawa inayoungwa mkono na sayansi

  • Inafanya kazi katika lugha 55
  • Uponyaji wa mitishamba unaungwa mkono na sayansi
  • Kutambua mimea kwa picha
  • Ramani ya GPS inayoshirikiana
  • Soma machapisho ya kisayansi yanayohusiana na utafutaji wako
  • Tafuta mimea ya dawa na athari zao
  • Panga maslahi yako na fanya tarehe ya utafiti wa habari, majaribio ya kliniki na ruhusu

Andika dalili au ugonjwa na usome juu ya mimea ambayo inaweza kusaidia, chapa mimea na uone magonjwa na dalili ambazo hutumiwa dhidi yake.
* Habari zote zinategemea utafiti wa kisayansi uliochapishwa

Google Play badgeApp Store badge