Biofeedback and Self-regulation

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 229–241 | Cite as

EMG scanning in the diagnosis of chronic pain

  • Jeffrey R. Cram
  • Jeffrey C. Steger


A surface EMG diagnostic protocol was developed to assess the neuromuscular/postural contributions to pain states. The EMG activity of the right and left aspects of 11 muscle groups were monitored while the patient was in the sitting and standing positions. The diagnostic protocol was evaluated by comparing the patterns of EMG activity in four diagnostic groups: headache only, neck/shoulder/upper back pain only, low back pain only, and mixed pain states. The results suggest that (1) bilateral levels of EMG activity in the frontalis and masseter groups are of primary importance for the headache patients, (2) the discrepancy between the right and left EMG activity in the lumbar and cervical paraspinal muscle groups are of primary importance for low back pain patients, (3) position (sit/stand) may provide important diagnostic information, and (4) the data appear to support the notion of a postural disturbance as a contributing factor in low back pain.

Descriptor Key Words

EMG biofeedback diagnosis pain 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Belar, C., & Cohen, J. The use of EMG biofeedback and progressive relaxation in the treatment of a woman with chronic back pain.Biofeedback and Self-Regulation. 1979,4(4), 345–353.Google Scholar
  2. Budzynski, T., Stoyva, J., Adler, C., & Mullaney, E. EMG biofeedback and tension headaches: A controlled outcome study.Psychosomatic Medicine 1973,35(6), 484–496.Google Scholar
  3. Cram, J. R. EMG biofeedback and the treatment of tension headaches: A systematic analysis of treatment components.Behavior Therapy 1981,11 699–710.Google Scholar
  4. DeBacher, G. Biofeedback in spasticity control. In J. J. Basmajian (Ed.),Biofeedback principles and practice for clinicians. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1979. Pp. 61–80.Google Scholar
  5. Donisch, E., & Basmajian, J. Electromyography of deep muscles in man.American Journal of Anatomy 1972,133 25–36.Google Scholar
  6. Floyd, W. F., & Silver, P. The function of the erectors spinae muscles in certain movements and postures in man.Journal of Physiology 1955,129 184–203.Google Scholar
  7. Fordyce, W. E.Behavioral methods for chronic pain and illness. St. Louis: C. V. Mosby, 1976,.Google Scholar
  8. Harper, R., & Steger, J. Psychological correlates of frontalis EMG and pain in tension headache.Headache 1978,18(4), 215–218.Google Scholar
  9. Haynes, S., Griffin, P., Mooney, D., & Parbe, M. Electromyograph feedback and relaxation instructions in the treatment of muscle contraction headache.Behavior Therapy 1975,6 672–678.Google Scholar
  10. Hollinshead, W. H. Functional anatomy of the limbs and back. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1976.Google Scholar
  11. Johnson, A. D.The problem claim: An approach to early identification. State of Washington: Department of Labor and Industries, 1978. (Mimeo)Google Scholar
  12. Jones, A., & Wolf, S. Treating chronic low back pain.Physical Therapy 1980,60(1), 58–63.Google Scholar
  13. Jonsson, B. The functions of individual muscles in the lumbar part of the erector spinae muscle.Electromyography 1970,10 5–21.Google Scholar
  14. Joseph, J.Man's posture: Electromyographic studies. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C Thomas, 1960.Google Scholar
  15. Kraus, H., & Raab, W.Hypokinetic disease. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C Thomas, 1961.Google Scholar
  16. Kravitz, E., Moore, M., Glaros, A., & Stauffer, T. EMG biofeedback and differential relaxation training to promote pain relief in chronic low back pain patients.Proceedings of the Biofeedback Society of America, Alburquerque, New Mexico, 1978.Google Scholar
  17. Nouwen, A., & Salinger, J. The effectiveness of EMG biofeedback in low back pain.Biofeedback and Self-Regulation 1979,4(2), 108–111.Google Scholar
  18. Pauly, J. E. An electromyographic analysis of certain movements and exercises. Part I: Some deep muscles of the back.Anatomy Records 1966,155 223–234.Google Scholar
  19. Sainsbury, P., & Gibson, J. F. Symptoms of anxiety and tension accompanying psychophysiological changes in the muscular system.Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 1954,17 216–224.Google Scholar
  20. Steger, J., & Harper, R. Comprehensive biofeedback versus self-monitored relaxation in the treatment of tension headaches.Headache 1980,20(3), 137–142.Google Scholar
  21. Vaughn, R., Pall, M. L., & Haynes, S. N. Frontalis EMG response to stress in subjects with frequent muscle-contraction headaches.Headache 1977,16 313–317.Google Scholar
  22. Wolf, S., & Basmajian, J. Assessment of paraspinal electromyographic activity in normal subjects and chronic back pain patients using a muscle biofeedback device. In E. Asmussen & K. Jorgensen (Eds.),International series on biomechanics (Vol. 6B). Baltimore: University Park Press, 1978.Google Scholar
  23. Wolf, S., Nacht, M., & Kelly, J. EMG feedback training during dynamic movement for low back pain patients.Behavior Therapy 1982,13 395–406.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jeffrey R. Cram
    • 1
  • Jeffrey C. Steger
    • 2
  1. 1.Swedish Hospital Medical CenterSeattle
  2. 2.University of Washington School of MedicineUSA

Personalised recommendations