Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 15, 2025
A Protocol of Manual Tests to Measure Sensation and Pain in Humans
Published on: December 19, 2016
How should we define and assess painful sensitivity in the hand? An international e-Delphi study
Andrea Hebert1, Joy MacDermid2, Jocelyn Harris1
1School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, c/o Institute for Applied Health Sciences, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Background:
Painful sensitivity in the hand is commonly seen with neuropathic pain, interfering with daily activities including rehabilitation. However, there are currently several terms used to describe the problem and a lack of guidance on what assessments should be used.
Purpose:
To gather expert opinion a) identifying current and common terminology used in hand therapy, b) developing a consensus definition of hypersensitivity, and c) developing consensus guidance on how to best assess allodynia.
Study Design:
International e-Delphi survey study.
Methods:
We conducted an e-Delphi consensus study drawing on international experts in hand rehabilitation. We planned up to four rounds of consensus-seeking, defining consensus as 75% or more of participants agreeing with a definition or recommendation. Experts were identified from 21 countries, with the nomination of other experts encouraged for 'snowball sampling'. The first round included clinical vignettes describing 'painful sensitivity of the hand' and asked participants to describe how they would assess each case. Definitions for hypersensitivity, tactile hyperesthesia, and allodynia were also requested.
Results:
We invited 68 participants: 44 more were added through nominations. Sixty-three agreed to participate and were sent the round one survey; 54 participants from 19 countries completed this survey and were invited to participate in all subsequent rounds. No two definitions of hypersensitivity were the same, while 87% of the definitions for allodynia and 78% for tactile hyperesthesia were concordant with a published taxonomy. Over 700 assessment items were proposed in round one: ultimately 38 items representing eight distinct constructs reached a consensus for assessing allodynia.
Conclusions:
Therapists definitions were consistent with an existing taxonomy for allodynia. Although hypersensitivity conceptualizations varied regarding the qualities of stimulus and response, a working definition was reached. Recommended assessments were relatively consistent internationally, holistic, and reflected a potential link between allodynia and central sensitization.
