METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Five electronic databases were extensively searched for potentially eligible studies published between 2003 and 2012. Two authors independently assessed selected articles using an MS-Word based form created for this review. Several domains (name of muscle, study type, sensor type, subject's types, muscle contraction, measured parameters, frequency range, hardware and software, signal processing and statistical analysis, results, applications, authors' conclusions and recommendations for future work) were extracted for further analysis. From a total of 2184 citations 119 were selected for full-text evaluation and 36 studies of MFs were identified. The systematic results find sufficient evidence that MMG may be used for assessing muscle fatigue, strength, and balance. This review also provides reason to believe that MMG may be used to examine muscle actions during movements and for monitoring muscle activities under various types of exercise paradigms.
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Overall judging from the increasing number of articles in recent years, this review reports sufficient evidence that MMG is increasingly being used in different aspects of MF. Thus, MMG may be applied as a useful tool to examine diverse conditions of muscle activity. However, the existing studies which examined MMG for MFs were confined to a small sample size of healthy population. Therefore, future work is needed to investigate MMG, in examining MFs between a sufficient number of healthy subjects and neuromuscular patients.
METHODS: An initial search of the SCOPUS database using an appropriate set of keywords yielded 290 studies, and 59 potential studies were selected after all the records were screened using the eligibility criteria. This review on crosstalk revealed that signal contamination due to crosstalk remains a major challenge in the application of surface myography techniques. Various methods have been employed in previous studies to identify, quantify and reduce crosstalk in surface myographic signals.
RESULTS: Although correlation-based methods for crosstalk quantification are easy to use, there is a possibility that co-contraction could be interpreted as crosstalk. High-definition EMG has emerged as a new technique that has been successfully applied to reduce crosstalk.
CONCLUSIONS: The phenomenon of crosstalk needs to be investigated carefully because it depends on many factors related to muscle task and physiology. This review article not only provides a good summary of the literature on crosstalk in myographic signals but also discusses new directions related to techniques for crosstalk identification, quantification and reduction. The review also provides insights into muscle-related issues that impact crosstalk in myographic signals.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the activity and relationship between surface EMG and static force from the BB muscle in terms of three sensor placement locations.
METHODS: Twenty-one right hand dominant male subjects (age 25.3 ± 1.2 years) participated in the study. Surface EMG signals were detected from the subject's right BB muscle. The muscle activation during force was determined as the root mean square (RMS) electromyographic signal normalized to the peak RMS EMG signal of isometric contraction for 10 s. The statistical analysis included linear regression to examine the relationship between EMG amplitude and force of contraction [40-100% of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC)], repeated measures ANOVA to assess differences among the sensor placement locations, and coefficient of variation (CoV) for muscle activity variation.
RESULTS: The results demonstrated that when the sensor was placed on the muscle belly, the linear slope coefficient was significantly greater for EMG versus force testing (r^{2} = 0.61, P > 0.05) than when placed on the lower part (r^{2}=0.31, P< 0.05) and upper part of the muscle belly (r^{2}=0.29, P > 0.05). In addition, the EMG signal activity on the muscle belly had less variability than the upper and lower parts (8.55% vs. 15.12% and 12.86%, respectively).
CONCLUSION: These findings indicate the importance of applying the surface EMG sensor at the appropriate locations that follow muscle fiber orientation of the BB muscle during static contraction. As a result, EMG signals of three different placements may help to understand the difference in the amplitude of the signals due to placement.
METHODS: Twenty-five subjects performed isometric elbow extension until failure, and the rate of fatigue (ROF), time to fatigue (TTF) and normalized TTF (NTTF) were statistically analysed. Subsequently, the behaviour of root-mean-square (RMS), mean-power frequency (MPF) and median-power frequency (MDF) under pre-, onset- and post-fatigue conditions were compared.
RESULTS: The findings indicated that, among the heads, ROF was statistically significant at 30% and 45% MVC (P<0.05) but TTF and NTTF at all intensities was statistically insignificant (P>0.05). For every head, only TTF was statistically significant (P<0.05) at different intensities. MPF and MDF under pre-, onset- and post-fatigue conditions were statistically significant (P<0.05) among the heads at all intensities, whereas RMS showed no such behaviour.
CONCLUSION: The investigated parameters reveal that the three heads of TB act independently before fatigue onset and appear to work in union after fatigue. Synergist head pairs exhibit similar spectral and temporal behaviour in contrast to the non-synergist TB head pair. We find spectral parameters to be more specific predictors of fatigue.
METHODS: MMG signals in longitudinal, lateral and transverse directions of muscle fibres were recorded from the elbow flexors of twenty-five male subjects using triaxial accelerometers. Cross-correlation coefficients were used to quantify the degree of crosstalk in all nine possible pairs of fibre axes, all muscle pairs and all exercises.
RESULTS: MMG root mean square (RMS) was statistically significant among the fibre axes (p<0.05, η2=0.17- 0.34) except for biceps brachii and brachioradialis in supination and brachialis in flexion. Overall mean crosstalk values in the three muscle pairs (biceps brachii & brachialis, brachialis & brachioradialis and brachioradialis & biceps brachii) were found to be 6.09-52.17%, 4.01-61.42% and 2.16-51.85%, respectively. Crosstalk values showed statistical significance among all nine axes pairs (p<0.05, η2=0.16-0.51) except for biceps brachii & brachialis during pronation. The transverse axes pair generated the lowest mean crosstalk values (2.16-9.14%).
CONCLUSION: MMG signals recorded using accelerometers from the transverse axes of muscle fibres in the elbow flexors are unique and yield the least amount of crosstalk.
METHODS: Segmented and validated wheeze sounds was collected from 55 asthmatic patients from the trachea and lower lung base (LLB) during tidal breathing maneuvers. Segmented wheeze sounds have been grouped in to nine datasets based on auscultation location, breath phases and a combination of phase and location. Frequency based features F25, F50, F75, F90, F99 and mean frequency (MF) were calculated from normalized power spectrum. Subsequently, multivariate analysis was performed.
RESULTS: Generally frequency features observe statistical significance (p < 0.05) for the majority of datasets to differentiate severity level Ʌ = 0.432-0.939, F(12, 196-1534) = 2.731-11.196, p < 0.05, ɳ2 = 0.061-0.568. It was observed that selected features performed better (higher effect size) for trachea related samples Ʌ = 0.432-0.620, F(12, 196-498) = 6.575-11.196, p < 0.05, ɳ2 = 0.386-0.568.
CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrated dthat severity levels of asthmatic patients with tidal breathing can be identified through computerized wheeze sound analysis. In general, auscultation location and breath phases produce wheeze sounds with different characteristics.