Consensus for experimental design in electromyography (CEDE) project: Electrode selection matrix

Manuela Besomi, Paul W. Hodges, Jaap Van Dieën, Richard G. Carson, Edward A. Clancy, Catherine Disselhorst-Klug, Aleš Holobar, François Hug, Matthew C. Kiernan, Madeleine Lowery, K. McGill, Roberto Merletti, Eric Perreault, K. Søgaard, K. Tucker, Thor Besier, R. Enoka, Deborah Falla, D. Farina, S. Gandevia & 3 others John C. Rothwell, Bill Vicenzino, Tim Wrigley

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

The Consensus for Experimental Design in Electromyography (CEDE) project is an international initiative which aims to guide decision-making in recording, analysis, and interpretation of electromyographic (EMG) data. The quality of the EMG recording, and validity of its interpretation depend on many characteristics of the recording set-up and analysis procedures. Different electrode types (i.e., surface and intramuscular) will influence the recorded signal and its interpretation. This report presents a matrix to consider the best electrode type selection for recording EMG, and the process undertaken to achieve consensus. Four electrode types were considered: (1) conventional surface electrode, (2) surface matrix or array electrode, (3) fine-wire electrode, and (4) needle electrode. General features, pros, and cons of each electrode type are presented first. This information is followed by recommendations for specific types of muscles, the information that can be estimated, the typical representativeness of the recording and the types of contractions for which the electrode is best suited. This matrix is intended to help researchers when selecting and reporting the electrode type in EMG studies.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)128-144
Number of pages17
JournalJournal of Electromyography and Kinesiology
Volume48
Early online date19 Jul 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2019

Fingerprint

Electromyography
Consensus
Electrodes
Research Design
Needles
Decision Making
Research Personnel
Muscles

Keywords

  • Consensus
  • Electrode types
  • Electromyography
  • Recording
  • Reporting

Cite this

Besomi, Manuela ; Hodges, Paul W. ; Van Dieën, Jaap ; Carson, Richard G. ; Clancy, Edward A. ; Disselhorst-Klug, Catherine ; Holobar, Aleš ; Hug, François ; Kiernan, Matthew C. ; Lowery, Madeleine ; McGill, K. ; Merletti, Roberto ; Perreault, Eric ; Søgaard, K. ; Tucker, K. ; Besier, Thor ; Enoka, R. ; Falla, Deborah ; Farina, D. ; Gandevia, S. ; Rothwell, John C. ; Vicenzino, Bill ; Wrigley, Tim. / Consensus for experimental design in electromyography (CEDE) project : Electrode selection matrix. In: Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology. 2019 ; Vol. 48. pp. 128-144.
@article{be39abba8d2d4cd29dfebca8efa4fe78,
title = "Consensus for experimental design in electromyography (CEDE) project: Electrode selection matrix",
abstract = "The Consensus for Experimental Design in Electromyography (CEDE) project is an international initiative which aims to guide decision-making in recording, analysis, and interpretation of electromyographic (EMG) data. The quality of the EMG recording, and validity of its interpretation depend on many characteristics of the recording set-up and analysis procedures. Different electrode types (i.e., surface and intramuscular) will influence the recorded signal and its interpretation. This report presents a matrix to consider the best electrode type selection for recording EMG, and the process undertaken to achieve consensus. Four electrode types were considered: (1) conventional surface electrode, (2) surface matrix or array electrode, (3) fine-wire electrode, and (4) needle electrode. General features, pros, and cons of each electrode type are presented first. This information is followed by recommendations for specific types of muscles, the information that can be estimated, the typical representativeness of the recording and the types of contractions for which the electrode is best suited. This matrix is intended to help researchers when selecting and reporting the electrode type in EMG studies.",
keywords = "Consensus, Electrode types, Electromyography, Recording, Reporting",
author = "Manuela Besomi and Hodges, {Paul W.} and {Van Die{\"e}n}, Jaap and Carson, {Richard G.} and Clancy, {Edward A.} and Catherine Disselhorst-Klug and Aleš Holobar and Fran{\cc}ois Hug and Kiernan, {Matthew C.} and Madeleine Lowery and K. McGill and Roberto Merletti and Eric Perreault and K. S{\o}gaard and K. Tucker and Thor Besier and R. Enoka and Deborah Falla and D. Farina and S. Gandevia and Rothwell, {John C.} and Bill Vicenzino and Tim Wrigley",
year = "2019",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jelekin.2019.07.008",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "128--144",
journal = "Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology",
issn = "1050-6411",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

Besomi, M, Hodges, PW, Van Dieën, J, Carson, RG, Clancy, EA, Disselhorst-Klug, C, Holobar, A, Hug, F, Kiernan, MC, Lowery, M, McGill, K, Merletti, R, Perreault, E, Søgaard, K, Tucker, K, Besier, T, Enoka, R, Falla, D, Farina, D, Gandevia, S, Rothwell, JC, Vicenzino, B & Wrigley, T 2019, 'Consensus for experimental design in electromyography (CEDE) project: Electrode selection matrix' Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, vol. 48, pp. 128-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2019.07.008

Consensus for experimental design in electromyography (CEDE) project : Electrode selection matrix. / Besomi, Manuela; Hodges, Paul W.; Van Dieën, Jaap; Carson, Richard G.; Clancy, Edward A.; Disselhorst-Klug, Catherine; Holobar, Aleš; Hug, François; Kiernan, Matthew C.; Lowery, Madeleine; McGill, K.; Merletti, Roberto; Perreault, Eric; Søgaard, K.; Tucker, K.; Besier, Thor; Enoka, R.; Falla, Deborah; Farina, D.; Gandevia, S.; Rothwell, John C.; Vicenzino, Bill; Wrigley, Tim.

In: Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, Vol. 48, 01.10.2019, p. 128-144.

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Consensus for experimental design in electromyography (CEDE) project

T2 - Electrode selection matrix

AU - Besomi, Manuela

AU - Hodges, Paul W.

AU - Van Dieën, Jaap

AU - Carson, Richard G.

AU - Clancy, Edward A.

AU - Disselhorst-Klug, Catherine

AU - Holobar, Aleš

AU - Hug, François

AU - Kiernan, Matthew C.

AU - Lowery, Madeleine

AU - McGill, K.

AU - Merletti, Roberto

AU - Perreault, Eric

AU - Søgaard, K.

AU - Tucker, K.

AU - Besier, Thor

AU - Enoka, R.

AU - Falla, Deborah

AU - Farina, D.

AU - Gandevia, S.

AU - Rothwell, John C.

AU - Vicenzino, Bill

AU - Wrigley, Tim

PY - 2019/10/1

Y1 - 2019/10/1

N2 - The Consensus for Experimental Design in Electromyography (CEDE) project is an international initiative which aims to guide decision-making in recording, analysis, and interpretation of electromyographic (EMG) data. The quality of the EMG recording, and validity of its interpretation depend on many characteristics of the recording set-up and analysis procedures. Different electrode types (i.e., surface and intramuscular) will influence the recorded signal and its interpretation. This report presents a matrix to consider the best electrode type selection for recording EMG, and the process undertaken to achieve consensus. Four electrode types were considered: (1) conventional surface electrode, (2) surface matrix or array electrode, (3) fine-wire electrode, and (4) needle electrode. General features, pros, and cons of each electrode type are presented first. This information is followed by recommendations for specific types of muscles, the information that can be estimated, the typical representativeness of the recording and the types of contractions for which the electrode is best suited. This matrix is intended to help researchers when selecting and reporting the electrode type in EMG studies.

AB - The Consensus for Experimental Design in Electromyography (CEDE) project is an international initiative which aims to guide decision-making in recording, analysis, and interpretation of electromyographic (EMG) data. The quality of the EMG recording, and validity of its interpretation depend on many characteristics of the recording set-up and analysis procedures. Different electrode types (i.e., surface and intramuscular) will influence the recorded signal and its interpretation. This report presents a matrix to consider the best electrode type selection for recording EMG, and the process undertaken to achieve consensus. Four electrode types were considered: (1) conventional surface electrode, (2) surface matrix or array electrode, (3) fine-wire electrode, and (4) needle electrode. General features, pros, and cons of each electrode type are presented first. This information is followed by recommendations for specific types of muscles, the information that can be estimated, the typical representativeness of the recording and the types of contractions for which the electrode is best suited. This matrix is intended to help researchers when selecting and reporting the electrode type in EMG studies.

KW - Consensus

KW - Electrode types

KW - Electromyography

KW - Recording

KW - Reporting

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069718634&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85069718634&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jelekin.2019.07.008

DO - 10.1016/j.jelekin.2019.07.008

M3 - Article

VL - 48

SP - 128

EP - 144

JO - Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

JF - Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology

SN - 1050-6411

ER -