A comparison of two commercial quantitative electromyographic algorithms with manual analysis

✍ Scribed by Mark B. Bromberg; A. Gordon Smith; Jay Bauerle

• Publisher: John Wiley and Sons
• Year: 1999
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 118 KB
• Volume: 22
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0148-639X
• DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-4598(199909)22:9<1244::aid-mus12>3.0.co;2-v

✦ Synopsis

Quantitative EMG (QEMG) is a useful technique in the evaluation of neuromuscular disease. Manual waveform measurements have been replaced by automated computer-based measurements, but there is no uniformity in computer algorithms used to make waveform measurements. We compared QEMG measurements made by algorithms in two commercially available EMG machines with manual measurements. Motor unit action potentials (MUAPs) were simultaneously fed into the two machines and analyzed using QEMG default settings and automatic waveform marking. The averaged MUAPs were also manually marked. The two algorithms and manual marking did not differ significantly for MUAP amplitude. There were significant differences between algorithms for duration and number of phases. Our study indicates that, although automated algorithms make QEMG more practical, visual inspection, and remarking of each MUAP if needed, is necessary before making clinical judgments from the data.