Consistency Analysis Between SUDOSCAN Examinations and Electromyography Results in Patients with Diabetes

Yue Zhao &ast;, Jin-Jing Bao &ast;, Li-Fang Ye, Lei Zhou Department of Endocrinology, Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Jiangsu Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province, 210029, People’s Republic of China&ast;These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Lei Zhou, Department of Endocrinology, Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Jiangsu Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine, No. 155 of Han Zhong Road, Qing Huai District, Nanjing City, Jiangsu Province, 210029, People’s Republic of China, Tel +86 13851989209, Email zhouleizl85@126.comObjective: To evaluate the consistency between SUDOSCAN examinations and electromyography (EMG) results in patients with diabetes.Methods: A total of 326 patients with diabetes (201 males and 125 females) who were hospitalized in the endocrinology ward of the Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine (Jiangsu Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine) from June 2020 to February 2021 were selected as participants. All the patients were tested using a SUDOSCAN conductance analyzer for electrical skin conductivities and EMG for nerve conduction. The differences and consistencies between the results of the two examinations were analyzed. McNemar’s test was used to analyze the differences between the results, and Cohen’s kappa test was utilized to test the consistencies.Results: A total of 174 patients had abnormal SUDOSCAN results, and 152 patients had normal SUDOSCAN results. The EMG results of 299 patients were abnormal, and the EMG results of 27 patients were normal. The McNemar test result was P = 0.000, and the differences between the results of the SUDOSCAN and EMG examinations were statistically significant (P < 0.01). No significant consistency was found between the SUDOSCAN and EMG results, meaning that the consistency between the two examination results was not statistically significant (P = 0.8