Comments on the reliability of muscle activity comparisons in EMG biofeedback research with back pain patients.

The underlying assumption in comparing muscle activity levels in back pain research is the reliability of the documented biological record. Surface-recorded EMG data are often used as "objective" indicators in treatment outcome studies. The present paper questions the reliability of this somatic measure. Three sources of error variance that interfere with the reliability of the recorded biological signal are discussed: movement of the body, replacement of electrodes, and electronic equipment instability. It is argued that surface-recorded EMG activities of the back are unreliable and unsuited for comparing the efficacy of a back pain treatment program.