Four objective tests to evaluate Raynaud's phenomena (RP) in workers exposed to handarm vibrations were applied on 23 exposed men with RP (vibration induced white finger 18, primary Raynaud's phenomenon 5), 56 exposed men without RP, and 15 male controls. Finger systolic blood pressure was measured by a cuff and strain gauge technique after combined body cooling and finger cooling during five minute ischaemia to 300, 15°, and 6°C. An attack of RP was detected as a zero pressure, FSP(0) test, whereas a pressure, reduced to a value below the normal 95% confidence limit at 60C, was regarded as an abnormal response, FSP(A) test. A hand cooling, preceded by 30 minute body precooling, was performed in water at 10°C during five minute ischaemia. The finger colours after hand cooling were evaluated by a directly visual inspection, FCV test, and by a blind assessment of slides of the photographed hand, FCS test. A medical interview was used as a method of reference. The sensitivity did not differ significantly between FSP(O) (74%), FCS (61%), and FCV (57%) (p > 0-10). FSP(A) had a significantly higher sensitivity (96%) and lower specificity (64%) than those of FCV and FCS (p < 0 0005) and of FSP (0) A medical interview is generally accepted for diagnosing Raynaud's phenomena (RP) in workers exposed to hand-arm vibrations. From the clinical and medicolegal points of view, however, objective diagnostic tests are needed. The main problem in objective diagnosis of RP is related to the episodic nature of vascular spasms that must be provoked under test conditions. The nosographic sensitivity of the classic cooling test, in which the finger colours are evaluated by visual inspection after hand cooling, varies considerably in workers exposed to vibration.'