Abstract
Background and objectiveOrofacial quantitative sensory testing (QST) is an increasingly valuable psychophysical tool for evaluating neurosensory disorders of the orofacial region. Here, we aimed to evaluate the current evidence regarding this testing method and to discuss its future clinical potential.Data treatmentWe conducted a literature search in Medline, Embase and Scopus for English‐language articles published between 1990 and 2019. The utilized search terms included QST, quantitative, sensory testing and neurosensory, which were combined using the AND operator with the terms facial, orofacial, trigeminal, intraoral and oral.ResultsOur findings highlighted many methods for conducting QST—including method of levels, method of limits and mapping. Potential stimuli also vary, and can include mechanical or thermal stimulation, vibration or pinprick stimuli. Orofacial QST may be helpful in revealing disease pathways and can be used for patient stratification to validate the use of neurosensory profile‐specific treatment options. QST is reportedly reliable in longitudinal studies and is thus a candidate for measuring changes over time. One disadvantage of QST is the substantial time required; however, further methodological refinements and the combination of partial aspects of the full QST battery with other tests and imaging methods should result in improvement.ConclusionsOverall, orofacial QST is a reliable testing method for diagnosing pathological neurosensory conditions and assessing normal neurosensory function. Despite the remaining challenges that hinder the use of QST for everyday clinical decisions and clinical trials, we expect that future improvements will allow its implementation in routine practice.
Highlights
For patients with sensory neuropathy, qualitative sensory testing (QualST) is the most commonly used method in clinical consultations, and quantitative sensory testing (QST) is purported to be useful for phenotyping (Forstenpointner, Otto, & Baron, 2017)
Orofacial QST may be helpful in revealing disease pathways and can be used for patient stratification to validate the use of neurosensory profile-specific treatment options
Despite the remaining challenges that hinder the use of QST for everyday clinical decisions and clinical trials, we expect that future improvements will allow its implementation in routine practice
Summary
For patients with sensory neuropathy, qualitative sensory testing (QualST) is the most commonly used method in clinical consultations, and quantitative sensory testing (QST) is purported to be useful for phenotyping (Forstenpointner, Otto, & Baron, 2017) Both QST and QualST are considered to be subjective, and many authors recommend objective sensory tests for neuropathy assessment (Teerijoki-Oksa et al, 2019). Nerve conduction tests such as somatic sensory evoked potentials, blink reflex, sudomotor and other reflex tests provide the most objective and repeatable measures as they exclusively assess the integrity of a few neural pathways (Dyck, 1991). Despite the remaining challenges that hinder the use of QST for everyday clinical decisions and clinical trials, we expect that future improvements will allow its implementation in routine practice
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
