Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Elsevier, Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, 6(35), p. 894-902

DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2008.11.017

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Performances of one-dimensional sonomyography and surface electromyography in tracking guided patterns of wrist extension

This paper is available in a repository.
This paper is available in a repository.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Electromyography (EMG) and ultrasonography have been widely used for skeletal muscle assessment. Recently, it has been demonstrated that the muscle thickness change collected by ultrasound during contraction, namely sonomyography (SMG), can also be used for assessment of muscles and has the potential for prosthetic control. In this study, the performances of one-dimensional sonomyography (1D SMG) and surface EMG (SEMG) signal in tracking the guided patterns of wrist extension were evaluated and compared, and the potential of 1D SMG for skeletal muscle assessment and prosthetic control was investigated. Sixteen adult normal subjects including eight males and eight females participated in the experiment. The subject was instructed to perform the wrist extension under the guidance of displayed sinusoidal, square and triangular waveforms at movement rates of 20, 30, 50 cycles per min. SMG and SEMG root mean squares (RMS) were collected from the extensor carpi radialis, respectively, and their RMS errors in relation to the guiding signals were calculated and compared. It was found that the mean RMS tracking errors of SMG under different movement rates were 18.9% ± 2.6% (mean ± SD), 18.3% ± 4.5%, and 17.0% ± 3.4% for sinusoidal, square and triangular guiding waveforms, while the corresponding values for SEMG were 30.3% ± 0.4%, 29.0% ± 2.7% and 24.7% ± 0.7%, respectively. Paired t test showed that the RMS errors of SMG tracking were significantly smaller than those of SEMG. Significant differences in RMS tracking errors of SMG among the three movement rates (p