Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology
Volume 20, Issue 3 , Pages 375-387, June 2010

Methodological aspects of SEMG recordings for force estimation – A tutorial and review

  • Didier Staudenmann

      Affiliations

    • Department of Integrative Physiology, Neurophysiology of Movement Laboratory, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA
  • ,
  • Karin Roeleveld

      Affiliations

    • Program for Human Movement Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
  • ,
  • Dick F. Stegeman

      Affiliations

    • Research Institute MOVE, Faculty of Human Movement Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat, 9, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    • Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Centre for Neuroscience, Radboud University, Nijmegen Medical Centre, Department of Clinical Neurophysiology, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
  • ,
  • Jaap H. van Dieën

      Affiliations

    • Research Institute MOVE, Faculty of Human Movement Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, Van der Boechorststraat, 9, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +31 20 4448501; fax: +31 20 4448529.

Received 22 December 2008; received in revised form 19 August 2009; accepted 19 August 2009. published online 16 September 2009.

Abstract 

Insight into the magnitude of muscle forces is important in biomechanics research, for example because muscle forces are the main determinants of joint loading. Unfortunately muscle forces cannot be calculated directly and can only be measured using invasive procedures. Therefore, estimates of muscle force based on surface EMG measurements are frequently used. This review discusses the problems associated with surface EMG in muscle force estimation and the solutions that novel methodological developments provide to this problem. First, some basic aspects of muscle activity and EMG are reviewed and related to EMG amplitude estimation. The main methodological issues in EMG amplitude estimation are precision and representativeness. Lack of precision arises directly from the stochastic nature of the EMG signal as the summation of a series of randomly occurring polyphasic motor unit potentials and the resulting random constructive and destructive (phase cancellation) superimpositions. Representativeness is an issue due the structural and functional heterogeneity of muscles. Novel methods, i.e. multi-channel monopolar EMG and high-pass filtering or whitening of conventional bipolar EMG allow substantially less variable estimates of the EMG amplitude and yield better estimates of muscle force by (1) reducing effects of phase cancellation, and (2) adequate representation of the heterogeneous activity of motor units within a muscle. With such methods, highly accurate predictions of force, even of the minute force fluctuations that occur during an isometric and isotonic contraction have been achieved. For dynamic contractions, EMG-based force estimates are confounded by the effects of muscle length and contraction velocity on force producing capacity. These contractions require EMG amplitude estimates to be combined with modeling of muscle contraction dynamics to achieve valid force predictions.

Keywords: Human, Surface electromyography, Multi-channel EMG, High-density EMG, Muscle contraction, Instrumentation, Methods, Biofeedback, Bio-physics, Selectivity, Representativeness

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1050-6411(09)00122-9

doi:10.1016/j.jelekin.2009.08.005

Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology
Volume 20, Issue 3 , Pages 375-387, June 2010