Monopolar needle electrode spatial recording characteristics

Muscle and Nerve

Volumn 19, Issue 10, 1996, Pages 1310-1319

  King, John C ^a   Dumitru, Daniel ^a   Stegeman, Dick ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER AT SAN ANTONIO   (United States)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

electrode modeling; electrodes; electrodiagnosis; instrumentation; monopolar

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ELECTRODE; ELECTRODIAGNOSIS; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; FREQUENCY MODULATION; INSTRUMENTATION; MOTOR UNIT POTENTIAL; NOISE; PHYSICAL MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; WAVEFORM;

ELECTRIC CONDUCTIVITY; ELECTRODES, IMPLANTED; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NEEDLES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0029788441     PISSN: 0148639X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4598(199610)19:10<1310::AID-MUS8>3.0.CO;2-H     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. Chu J, Chan RC, Bruyninckx F: Progressive Teflon denudation of the monopolar needle: effects on motor unit potential parameters. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1987;68:36-40.
2. Dumitru D: Electrodiagnostic Medicine. Philadelphia, Hanley and Belfus, 1995, pp 69-72.
3. Dumitru D: Single muscle fiber discharges (insertional activity, end-plate potentials, positive sharp waves and fibrillation potentials): a unifying proposal. Muscle Nerve 1996;19:221-226, 229-230.
4. Geddes LA, Baker LE: Principles of Applied Biomedical Instrumentation. New York, Wiley, 1989, pp 315-322.
5. Gootzen THJM, Theeuwen MMHJ, Stegeman DF: The calculated influence of a metal electrode shaft in needle EMG recordings, in Yongmin K (ed): Images of the Twenty-First Century. Proc Annu Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 1989;3:992-993.
6. Henneberg KA, Plonsey R: Boundary element analysis of the directional sensitivity of the concentric EMG electrode. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1993;40:621-631.
7. Jasper H, Ballem G: Unipolar electromyogram of normal and denervated human muscle. J Neurophysiol 1949;12:231-244.
8. 8: Nandedkar SD, Sanders DB: Recording characteristics of monopolar EMG electrodes. Muscle Nerve 1991;14:108-112.
9. Nandedkar SD, Sanders DB, Stålberg EV, Andreassen S: Simulation of concentric needle EMG motor unit action potentials. Muscle Nerve 1988;11:151-159.
10. Nunez PL: Electric Fields of the Brain. New York, Oxford University Press, 1981, pp 82-83, 140-175.
11. Stålberg EV, ChuJ, Bril V, Nandedkar S, Stålberg S, Ericsson M: Automatic analysis of the EMG interference pattern. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1983;56:672-681.
12. Stegeman DF, Gootzen THJM, Theeuwen MMHJ, Vingerhoets HJM: Intramuscular potential changes caused by the presence of the recording EMG needle electrode. Eletroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 1994;93:81-90.