Ian A F Stokes1. 1. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Vermont, Stafford Hall 434, Burlington, VT 05405-0084, USA. Ian.Stokes@uvm.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electromyograms are used in increasingly sophisticated biomechanical analyses to estimate forces within the trunk to prevent and evaluate painful spinal conditions. However, even under nominally isometric conditions the relationship between EMG and effort is complex. This study quantified influences of pulling direction, increasing versus decreasing effort and electromechanical delay on the EMG/effort relationships for principal lower trunk muscle groups in isometric pulling tasks, to determine whether the observed differences between increasing versus decreasing effort relationships were consistent with electromechanical delay or activation differences. METHODS: Twenty-three healthy subjects (15 male, 8 female; mean age 32 years; mean bodymass 74.5 kg) each stood in an apparatus to stabilize the pelvis and performed ramped isometric efforts with a harness around the thorax connected to each of a series of five anchor points on the wall, for angles of pull at each 45 degrees increment from 0 degrees to 180 degrees to the anterior direction. A load cell recorded the generated force for a 5 s timed increase up to a voluntary maximum, a 1s 'dwell', and a 5 s relaxation back to zero effort. EMG signals were recorded via electrodes (surface, except indwelling for multifidus) from right and left rectus abdominis, internal and external obliques, longissimus, iliocostalis and L2 and L4 level multifidus. EMG signals were rectified with a 250 ms root-mean-square moving average filter. Effort-increasing and effort-decreasing sections of recordings were analyzed separately. FINDINGS: The EMG/effort relationship had a statistically significantly greater gradient as the effort was increasing than when decreasing for 28 of 70 muscle-angle permutations. This difference in gradient was found to explain a significant part of the apparent lag between effort generated and EMG signal that averaged between 261 and 658 ms before and between 31 and 196 ms for different muscles after the slope difference was taken into account. INTERPRETATION: The findings were consistent with the notion that the motor unit recruitment differs in increasing versus decreasing isometric efforts, probably because of a small stretching of the muscle as its tension increases. The residual temporal delay was thought to represent electromechanical delay.
BACKGROUND: Electromyograms are used in increasingly sophisticated biomechanical analyses to estimate forces within the trunk to prevent and evaluate painful spinal conditions. However, even under nominally isometric conditions the relationship between EMG and effort is complex. This study quantified influences of pulling direction, increasing versus decreasing effort and electromechanical delay on the EMG/effort relationships for principal lower trunk muscle groups in isometric pulling tasks, to determine whether the observed differences between increasing versus decreasing effort relationships were consistent with electromechanical delay or activation differences. METHODS: Twenty-three healthy subjects (15 male, 8 female; mean age 32 years; mean bodymass 74.5 kg) each stood in an apparatus to stabilize the pelvis and performed ramped isometric efforts with a harness around the thorax connected to each of a series of five anchor points on the wall, for angles of pull at each 45 degrees increment from 0 degrees to 180 degrees to the anterior direction. A load cell recorded the generated force for a 5 s timed increase up to a voluntary maximum, a 1s 'dwell', and a 5 s relaxation back to zero effort. EMG signals were recorded via electrodes (surface, except indwelling for multifidus) from right and left rectus abdominis, internal and external obliques, longissimus, iliocostalis and L2 and L4 level multifidus. EMG signals were rectified with a 250 ms root-mean-square moving average filter. Effort-increasing and effort-decreasing sections of recordings were analyzed separately. FINDINGS: The EMG/effort relationship had a statistically significantly greater gradient as the effort was increasing than when decreasing for 28 of 70 muscle-angle permutations. This difference in gradient was found to explain a significant part of the apparent lag between effort generated and EMG signal that averaged between 261 and 658 ms before and between 31 and 196 ms for different muscles after the slope difference was taken into account. INTERPRETATION: The findings were consistent with the notion that the motor unit recruitment differs in increasing versus decreasing isometric efforts, probably because of a small stretching of the muscle as its tension increases. The residual temporal delay was thought to represent electromechanical delay.
Authors: Joan Lobo-Prat; Arvid Q L Keemink; Arno H A Stienen; Alfred C Schouten; Peter H Veltink; Bart F J M Koopman Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil Date: 2014-04-19 Impact factor: 4.262