Premium
A comparison of two commercial quantitative electromyographic algorithms with manual analysis
Author(s) -
Bromberg Mark B.,
Smith A. Gordon,
Bauerle Jay
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
muscle and nerve
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.025
H-Index - 145
eISSN - 1097-4598
pISSN - 0148-639X
DOI - 10.1002/(sici)1097-4598(199909)22:9<1244::aid-mus12>3.0.co;2-v
Subject(s) - waveform , computer science , motor unit , electromyography , algorithm , pattern recognition (psychology) , speech recognition , artificial intelligence , physical medicine and rehabilitation , medicine , anatomy , telecommunications , radar
Quantitative EMG (QEMG) is a useful technique in the evaluation of neuromuscular disease. Manual waveform measurements have been replaced by automated computer‐based measurements, but there is no uniformity in computer algorithms used to make waveform measurements. We compared QEMG measurements made by algorithms in two commercially available EMG machines with manual measurements. Motor unit action potentials (MUAPs) were simultaneously fed into the two machines and analyzed using QEMG default settings and automatic waveform marking. The averaged MUAPs were also manually marked. The two algorithms and manual marking did not differ significantly for MUAP amplitude. There were significant differences between algorithms for duration and number of phases. Our study indicates that, although automated algorithms make QEMG more practical, visual inspection, and remarking of each MUAP if needed, is necessary before making clinical judgments from the data. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Muscle Nerve 22: 1244–1248, 1999.