|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Articles in PresS, published online ahead of print December 6, 2002
J Appl Physiol, 10.1152/jap.00698.2002
Submitted on July 29, 2002
Accepted on November 14, 2002
1 Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA
2 Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA; Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: m-lowery{at}northwestern.edu.
Cross-correlation between surface EMG signals is commonly used as a means of quantifying EMG cross-talk during voluntary activation. To examine the reliability of this method, the relationship between cross-talk and the cross-correlation between surface EMG signals was examined using model simulation. The simulation results illustrate an increase in cross-talk with increasing subcutaneous fat thickness. The results also indicate that the cross-correlation function decays more rapidly with increasing distance from the active fibers than cross-talk, which was defined as the normalized EMG amplitude during activation of a single muscle. The influence of common drive and short-term motor unit synchronization on the cross-correlation between surface EMG signals was also examined. While common drive did not alter the maximum value of the cross-correlation function, the correlation increased with increasing motor unit synchronization. It is concluded that cross-correlation analysis is not a suitable means of quantifying cross-talk or of distinguishing between cross-talk and coactivation during voluntary contraction. Furthermore, it is possible that a high correlation between surface EMG signals may reflect an association between motor unit firing times, for example due to motor unit synchronization.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. G. Keenan and F. J. Valero-Cuevas Experimentally Valid Predictions of Muscle Force and EMG in Models of Motor-Unit Function Are Most Sensitive to Neural Properties J Neurophysiol, September 1, 2007; 98(3): 1581 - 1590. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. G. Keenan, D. Farina, F. G. Meyer, R. Merletti, and R. M. Enoka Sensitivity of the cross-correlaton between simulated surface EMGs for two muscles to detect motor unit synchronization J Appl Physiol, March 1, 2007; 102(3): 1193 - 1201. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Farina, R. Merletti, and R. M. Enoka The extraction of neural strategies from the surface EMG J Appl Physiol, April 1, 2004; 96(4): 1486 - 1495. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH |
| Visit Other APS Journals Online |