Abstract Details

Title Patient-reported pain experience during nerve conduction studies and needle electromyography

Topic Neuromuscular and Clinical Neurophysiology (EMG)

Presentation(s) P1 - Poster Session 1 (9:00 AM-5:00 PM)

Poster/Presentation
Number 397

Objective The objective of this study was to determine patient reported pain after nerve conduction studies (NCS) and needle electromyography (EMG), and compare which component was reported as being more painful.

Background Patients are often anxious about electrodiagnostic testing, particularly when the study is described to them during their visit. The needle examination in particular tends to produce anxiety; however anecdotally, after the test is complete, many patients report that the nerve conduction studies were more painful.

Design/Methods

All patients attending an academic neurophysiology laboratory were offered to participate in a brief survey of pain during their NCS/EMG study. This was a brief anonymous questionnaire completed after each component of the study.

Results

250 patients completed the questionnaire, with 55% female, 45% male, with a mean age 51.6 years. Pain after NCS was rated as: No pain (13%), Mild pain (46%), Moderate pain (35%), Severe pain (6%). Pain after EMG was rated as: No pain (8%), Mild pain (67%), Moderate pain (22%), Severe pain (3%). There was no significant difference between the procedures in regards to which was rated as more painful: EMG (48%) and NCS (43%). Twenty two percent of patients responded that they would refuse to have electrodiagnostic studies repeated if required.

Conclusions Most patients rated pain during NCS and EMG as mild or moderate, and few as severe. Interestingly, the number of patients who rated NCS as the more painful component was quite similar to the number that rated EMG as the more painful component of the test. A relatively large proportion (1 in 5) would not want to have the test repeated.

Authors/Disclosures
PRESENTER	No disclosure on file
Gil Midroni, MD (St Michaels Hospital)	No disclosure on file
Charles Kassardjian, MD, FAAN (St. Michael's Hospital - Clinical Neurophysiology)	Dr. Kassardjian has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Sanofi Genzyme. Dr. Kassardjian has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Alexion. Dr. Kassardjian has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Argenx. Dr. Kassardjian has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for UCB. Dr. Kassardjian has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Astra Zeneca. Dr. Kassardjian has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Scientific Advisory or Data Safety Monitoring board for Johnson and Johnson. Dr. Kassardjian has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Alexion. Dr. Kassardjian has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Argenx. Dr. Kassardjian has received personal compensation in the range of $500-$4,999 for serving on a Speakers Bureau for Sanofi Genzyme.

��ɫ��

��ɫ��