The influence of electrode position on bipolar surface electromyogram recordings of the upper trapezius muscle

  • Chris Jensen
  • Ottar Vasseljen
  • Rolf H. Westgaard
Article

Summary

The effect of electrode position on the upper trapezius muscle on the myo-electric signal amplitude was investigated with special reference to arm position and estimate of force output. Previously, a depression of the electromyogram (EMG) signal has been reported midway between the seventh cervical vertebrae (C7) and acromion (Veiersted 1991, Eur J Appl Physiol 62:91–98) although this electrode position has been recommended (Zipp 1982, Eur J Appl Physiol 50:41–54). Ten healthy subjects performed maximal shoulder elevations with the arm in vertical, abducted and flexed positions and they performed a dynamic movement test. The myo-electric signal was recorded along the length of the right upper trapezius muscle by a 16-channel bipolar array electrode and was integrated with a 0.2-s time resolution. A region just lateral to the midpoint between C7 and the lateral edge of acromion was found with high and stable amplitudes (% coefficient of variation equalled 5.6). At the midpoint a dip in the amplitude profile appeared which was slightly displaced by arm abduction or flexion probably due to sliding, of the skin relative to the muscle. A linear EMG-force relationship was found in the region with high signal amplitudes, whereas the more lateral and the dip region showed highly variable EMG-force relationships. Thus, it was found that when using bipolar surface electrodes with an interelectrode distance of 2 cm a centre position 2 cm lateral to the midpoint between C7 and acromion provided good repeatability and high signal yield.

Key words

Trapezius muscle Electromyography Electrode position Force Arm position 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Basmajian JV, De Luca CJ (1985) Muscles alive. Williams and Wilkins, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  2. Bjelle A, Hagberg M, Michaelsson G (1981) Occupational and individual factors in acute shoulder-neck disorders among industrial workers. Br J Ind Med 38:356–363Google Scholar
  3. Chaffin DB, Lee M, Freivalds A (1980) Muscle strength assessment from EMG analysis. Med Sci Sports Exerc 12:205–211Google Scholar
  4. Christensen H (1986) Muscle activity and fatigue in the shoulder muscles of assembly plant employees. Scand J Work Environ Health 12:582–587Google Scholar
  5. Hagberg C, Hagberg M (1989) Surface EMG amplitude and frequency dependence on exerted force for the upper trapezius muscle: a comparison between right and left sides. Eur J Appl Physiol 58:641–645Google Scholar
  6. Jensen B (1992) Isometric contractions of small muscle groups. (PhD-thesis) Natl Inst Occup Health and Univ of Copenhagen, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  7. Jensen C, Nilsen K, Hansen K, Westgaard RH (1993) Trapezius muscle load as a risk indicator for occupational shoulder-neck complaints. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 64:415–423Google Scholar
  8. Jonsson B (1982) Measurement and evaluation of local muscular strain in the shoulder during constrained work. J Hum Ergol 11:73–88Google Scholar
  9. Lawrence JH, De Luca CJ (1983) Myoelectric signal versus force relationship in different human muscles. J Appl Physiol 54:1653–1659Google Scholar
  10. Mathiassen SE, Winkel J (1990) EMG-glenohumeral torque activity in the shoulder-neck region according to arm position and external load. Eur J Appl Physiol 61:370–379Google Scholar
  11. Schüldt K, Ekholm J, Harms-Ringdahl K, Arborelius UP, Nemeth G (1987) Influence of sitting postures on neck and shoulder e.m.g. during arm-hand work movements. Clin Biomech 2:126–139Google Scholar
  12. Veiersted KB (1991) The reproducibility of test contractions for calibration of electromyographic measurements. Eur J Appl Physiol 62:91–98Google Scholar
  13. Veiersted KB, Westgaard RH, Andersen P (1990) Pattern of muscle activity during stereotyped work and its relation to muscle pain. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 62:31–41Google Scholar
  14. Vigreux B, Cnockaert JC, Pertuzon E (1979) Factors influencing quantified surface EMGs. Eur J Appl Physiol 41:119–129Google Scholar
  15. Westgaard RH (1988) Measurement and evaluation of postural load in occupational work situations. Eur J Appl Physiol 57:291–304Google Scholar
  16. Westgaard RH, Bjørklund R (1987) Generation of muscle tension additional to postural muscle load. Ergonomics 30:911–923Google Scholar
  17. Zipp P (1982) Recommendations for the standardization of lead positions in surface electromyography. Eur J Appl Physiol 50:41–54Google Scholar
  18. Zuniga N, Truong XT, Simons DG (1970) Effects of skin electrode position on averaged electromyographic potentials. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 51:264–272Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chris Jensen
    • 1
  • Ottar Vasseljen
    • 1
  • Rolf H. Westgaard
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Organization and Work ScienceThe Norwegian Institute of TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations