• Jeremy Walsh, Martin I Rabey, and Toby M Hall.
• School of Physiotherapy, Royal College of Surgeons, Dublin, Ireland. Jeremywalsh2010@gmail.com
• J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2012 Mar 1;35(3):196-202.

ObjectiveThe self-report Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-LANSS) and Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions (DN4) neuropathic pain screening tools have been shown to be reliable, valid, and able to differentiate neuropathic pain from inflammatory or mixed pain syndromes. However, no studies have compared these tools to determine whether their outcomes are similar. This study evaluated agreement and correlation between the S-LANSS and DN4 in the identification of neuropathic pain in subjects with low back-related leg pain.MethodsThis observational study compared S-LANSS and DN4 scores in 45 patients with low back-related leg pain. The S-LANSS and DN4 cutoff scores of 12 and 4, respectively, were used to classify subjects as positive or negative for the presence of neuropathic pain for each screening tool. The κ statistic was used to determine whether there was agreement in classification of neuropathic pain between the 2 screening tools. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to determine correlation between scores of the 2 screening tools.ResultsNeuropathic pain was identified in 15 subjects (33%) using the S-LANSS and in 19 subjects (42%) using the DN4. Agreement on neuropathic pain classification was fair, with a κ value of 0.34. There was moderate to good correlation (r = 0.62; P < .001) between scores obtained from the 2 tools.ConclusionsThe finding of fair agreement suggests that despite the moderate to good correlation between scores, the cutoff points for the classification of neuropathic pain of the 2 tools may not be congruent.Copyright © 2012 National University of Health Sciences. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

32 keywords...

hide…