Comparison of clinical diagnoses versus computerized test diagnoses for chronic pain

Nelson Hendler, Craig Berzoksky, Reginald Davis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Past research from Mensana Clinic found that 40 - 71% of chronic pain patients had overlooked diagnoses, underscoring the need for more accurate diagnostic methodology. In this study, 937 diagnoses were made by the senior author during the initial evaluation of 87 chronic pain patients. Of these diagnoses, 903 diagnoses made by the senior author were also made by the computer scored and interpreted Mensana Clinic Diagnostics (MCD) "Diagnostic Paradigm." The MCD Diagnostic Paradigm matched the senior author's evaluation 96.37% of the time, and the Diagnostic Paradigm missed 34 diagnoses made by the senior author, for a 3.63% "missed diagnosis" rate, based on the initial clinic evaluation. Overall, there were 2764 "false positives", i.e. diagnoses made by the Diagnostic Paradigm, but not made by the senior author. However, when analyzed by diagnostic groups, 2639 of the 2764 95.5% of the "false positive" diagnoses were in the same diagnostic group as the diagnoses made by the senior author. Therefore, these patients would receive the same diagnostic studies, thereby helping differentiate the correct dignoses from the "false positive" diagnosis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)8-17+135
JournalPan Arab Journal of Neurosurgery
Volume11
Issue number2
StatePublished - Oct 1 2007

Keywords

  • Chronic pain
  • Complex regional pain syndrome
  • Radiculopathy
  • Reflex sympathetic dystrophy and expert system

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of clinical diagnoses versus computerized test diagnoses for chronic pain'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this