Tweet
Dear Biomch-list members,
I am interested in quantifying co-activation of antagonistic muscles during
walking in 2 different adult population groups. Surface EMG will be used to
measure the EMG signals from selected muscles during the activity, and the
raw EMG will be processed to derive a time-series RMS signal for each
muscle. The time-series RMS signals will be temporally normalized with
regard to the cycle time, i.e. to a percentage of the gait cycle.
My question is, should the amplitude of the EMG measured from a muscle
during walking be normalized to a percentage of either: a) the peak EMG
amplitude measured during a maximal voluntary isometric contraction, b) the
peak EMG amplitude measured during a maximal voluntary isotonic contraction,
or, c) the peak EMG amplitude measured during the activity?
>From my review of the literature, it appears that methods a) & c) are the
most common and both appear to have their strengths and weaknesses. Any
comments on which of the above methods are:
- the most valid,
- show the greatest intra-subject reliability and reproducibility,
and/or
- show the least inter-subject variability,
would be greatly appreciated. Also if anyone has used or knows of other
methods to normalize the amplitude of dynamic EMG during submaximal
activities, please let me know.
I will post a summary of responses in a fortnight.
Thank-you
Peter Mills
Peter Mills
School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science
Griffith University Gold Coast
Southport QLD 4215
Australia
p.mills@mailbox.gu.edu.au
---------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send SIGNOFF BIOMCH-L to LISTSERV@nic.surfnet.nl
For information and archives: http://isb.ri.ccf.org/biomch-l
---------------------------------------------------------------
I am interested in quantifying co-activation of antagonistic muscles during
walking in 2 different adult population groups. Surface EMG will be used to
measure the EMG signals from selected muscles during the activity, and the
raw EMG will be processed to derive a time-series RMS signal for each
muscle. The time-series RMS signals will be temporally normalized with
regard to the cycle time, i.e. to a percentage of the gait cycle.
My question is, should the amplitude of the EMG measured from a muscle
during walking be normalized to a percentage of either: a) the peak EMG
amplitude measured during a maximal voluntary isometric contraction, b) the
peak EMG amplitude measured during a maximal voluntary isotonic contraction,
or, c) the peak EMG amplitude measured during the activity?
>From my review of the literature, it appears that methods a) & c) are the
most common and both appear to have their strengths and weaknesses. Any
comments on which of the above methods are:
- the most valid,
- show the greatest intra-subject reliability and reproducibility,
and/or
- show the least inter-subject variability,
would be greatly appreciated. Also if anyone has used or knows of other
methods to normalize the amplitude of dynamic EMG during submaximal
activities, please let me know.
I will post a summary of responses in a fortnight.
Thank-you
Peter Mills
Peter Mills
School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science
Griffith University Gold Coast
Southport QLD 4215
Australia
p.mills@mailbox.gu.edu.au
---------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe send SIGNOFF BIOMCH-L to LISTSERV@nic.surfnet.nl
For information and archives: http://isb.ri.ccf.org/biomch-l
---------------------------------------------------------------