Advertisement

Surface Conduction Analysis of EMG Signal from Forearm Muscles

  • Y. Nakajima
  • S. Yoshinari
  • S. Tadano
Part of the IFMBE Proceedings book series (IFMBE, volume 23)

Abstract

Determining muscle forces of the finger during heavy work is important for an understanding and prevention of tenosynovitis. Electromyography is one index of muscle activity. Measurements by surface electromyography (sEMG) are noninvasive and simple to apply to obtain signals of muscle action potentials. The sEMG potentials of muscles near the electrode are superimposed. To identify the muscle activities from sEMG measurements, it is necessary first to analyze the characteristics of sEMG conduction in the forearm. This paper develops a conduction model of the forearm that incorporates the muscles and the radius and ulna bones. sEMG distributions were analyzed using the finite element method. The Root mean square (RMS) values of sEMG values and the power exponent of the attenuation (PEA) in relation to the length between the electrode and the source of muscle action potential were estimated in this work. Further, the positions of muscle action potential were reverse-estimated using the RMS values and the PEA. As a result, the PEA was found to increase monotonically with increases in the inter-electrode distance (IED) of the surface electrode pair. The errors in the estimated positions of muscle action potential increased with decreases in the distance between the source of muscle action potential and the radius and ulna bones.

Keywords

Forearm Muscle Force Surface Electromyography (sEMG) Conductive Model Reverse-estimation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Vigouroux L et al. (2007) Using EMG Data to Constrain Optimization Procedure Improves Finger Tendon Tension Estimations During Static Fingertip Force Production. J Biomech, Vol. 40, 2846–2856 DOI 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.03.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burger H C and Van Dongen, R (1961) Specific Electric Resistance of Body Tissues. Phys Med Biol 5:431–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Saha S and Williams P A (1992) Electric and Dielectric Properties of Wet Human Cortical Bone as a Function of Frequency. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 39:1298–1304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rosenfalk P (1969) Intra-and Extracellular Potential Fields of Active Nerve and Muscle Fibres. Acta Phisiol Scand Suppl 321Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stoykov N S et al (2002) Frequency-and Time-Domain FEM Models of EMG: Capacitive Effects and Aspects of Dispersion. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 49:763–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Roeleveld K et al. (1997) Motor Unit Potential Contribution to Surface Electromyography. Acta Phisiol Scand, 160:175–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation of Medical and Biological Engineering 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. Nakajima
    • 1
  • S. Yoshinari
    • 1
  • S. Tadano
    • 2
  1. 1.Dept. of Product TechnologyHokkaido Industrial Research InstituteSapporoJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of EngineeringHokkaido UniversitySapporoJapan

Personalised recommendations