Stability of the EMG Signal Level Within a Six-Day Measuring Cycle

  • Robert Barański
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 831)


This paper presents the results of research on the identification of changes in the electromyographic (EMG) signal recorded with the surface method (sEMG) over the course of six consecutive days. The signal was recorded for two people. The electrodes were fixed on the upper limb in two places of the forearm (over the brachioradialis and the bully of the superficial flexor (flexor digitorum superficialis). Muscles were activated by the hand clamp on the handle in the range of 25 \(\div \) 100 N. 21 measurement series were analysed, which consisted of 966 individual clamps. Estimates like root mean square, average value, energy and turn per second were used for the research. Due to the lack of a normal distribution of the estimators, non-parametric tests were performed in most cases. The tests carried out did not allow us to infer about the lack of changes in the signal over the period of six days under investigation. Moreover, by shortening the period of the tested series even to several successive series of measurements, it was also impossible to determine consistent conclusions for all the tested forces. Registered signals were characterized by very high variability between particular series. What’s more, the correlation studies between changes of individual forces per day also do not support the hypothesis that there is a constant, time-independent measurement of the relationship between the recorded EMG signal and the force.


EMG sEMG Force estimation Signal analysis EMG measurement 



This work was supported by the AGH University of Science and Technology [grant number].


  1. 1.
    Basmajian, J.V.: Muscle Alive: Their Functions Revealed by Electromyography. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore (1963)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bohannon, R.W.: Hand-grip dynamometry predicts future outcomes in aging adults. J. Geriatr. Phys. Ther. 31, 3–10 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shechtman, O., Gestewitz, L., Kimble, C.: Reliability and validity of the DynEx dynamometer. J. Hand Ther. 18, 339–347 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lagerström, C., Nordgren, B., Olerud, C.: Evaluation of grip strength measurements after Colles’ fracture: a methodological study. Scand. J. Rehabil. Med. 31, 49–54 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Duque, J., Masset, D., Malchaire, J.: Evaluation of handgrip force from EMG measurements. Appl. Ergon. 26, 61–66 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hoozemans, M.J.M., Van Dieën, J.H.: Prediction of handgrip forces using surface EMG of forearm muscles. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 15, 358–366 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Oskouei, A.H., Carman, A.: Prediction of hand grip force using forearm surface displacement. J. Biomech. 45, S513 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Roman-Liu, D., Bartuzi, P.: The influence of wrist posture on the time and frequency EMG signal measures of forearm muscles. Gait Posture 37, 340–344 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barandun, M., von Tscharner, V., Meuli-Simmen, C., Bowen, V., Valderrabano, V.: Frequency and conduction velocity analysis of the abductor pollicis brevis muscle during early fatigue. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 19, 65–74 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Roman-Liu, D.: The influence of confounding factors on the relationship between muscle contraction level and MF and MPF values of EMG signal: a review. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. 22, 77–91 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    International Standard Organisation, ISO 5349-1:2001: Mechanical vibration – measurement and evaluation of human exposure to hand-transmitted vibration – Part 1: general requirements (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reicher, M., Bohenek, A. Anatomia ogólna: kości, stawy i wiezadła, mieśnie (Human anatomy: bones, joints and ligaments, muscles). Wydawnictwo Lekarskie PZWL (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gruet, M., Vallier, J.M., Mely, L., Brisswalter, J.: Long term reliability of EMG measurements in adults with cystic fibrosis. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 20, 305–312 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Breit, S., Spieker, S., Schulz, J.B., Gasser, T.: Long-term EMG recordings differentiate between Parkinsonian and essential tremor. J. Neurol. 255, 103–111 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pylatiuk, C., et al.: Comparison of surface EMG monitoring electrodes for long-term use in rehabilitation device control. In: IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, ICORR 2009, pp. 300–304. IEEE (2009).
  16. 16.
    Kollmitzer, J., Ebenbichler, G.R., Kopf, A.: Reliability of surface electromyographic measurements. Clin. Neurophysiol. 110, 725–734 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Barański, R., Kozupa, A.: Hand grip-EMG muscle response. Acta Phys. Pol. A 125, A-7–A-10 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Netter, F.H., Thompson, J.C., Dziak, A., Kamiński, B.: Atlas anatomii ortopedycznej Nettera (Netter’s Concise Atlas of Orthopaedic Anatomy). Elsevier Urban & Partner (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Morletti, R.: Standards for Reporting EMG Data. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 39, I–II (2018). Politecnico di Torino, ItaltyGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stanisz, A.: Przystepny kurs statystyki z zastosowaniem STATISTICA PL na przykładach z medycyny (Statistic course using STATISTICA software on examples of medicine). StatSoft Polska (2006)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Doheny, E.P., Lowery, M.M., FitzPatrick, D.P., O’Malley, M.J.: Effect of elbow joint angle on force-EMG relationships in human elbow flexor and extensor muscles. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 18, 760–770 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AGH University of Science and TechnologyKrakówPoland

Personalised recommendations