Sensitivity, low-frequency filter, high-frequency filter, sweep speed, duration of pulse, rate of pulse, and the machine used were not specified.
This study was performed in the supine position, with the elbow and fingers slightly flexed.
According to a previous standardized technique [
1], the author used the antidromic method [
2]; signals were recorded 14 cm distally from the wrist to a nonspecified finger (Figs.
2). Probably he recorded sensory potentials from digit II (R), placing the active electrode (A) to the base of the digit and placing the reference (R) 4 cm proximally to the active electrode, slightly distal to the distal interphalangeal joint. Ground (G) electrode position was not specified in the paper; it was probably placed over the midforearm or on the palm of the hand (the figure shows the ground electrode placed on the palm).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Melvin JL, Harris DH, Johnson EW (1966) Sensory and motor conduction velocities in the ulnar and median nerves. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 47:511–519PubMedGoogle Scholar
Kaplan PE, Sahgal V (1978) Residual latency: new applications of an old technique. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 59:24–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
Kaplan PE (1976) Sensory and motor residual latency measurements in healthy patients and patients with neuropathy – part 1. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 39:338–340PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar