Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorFuglevand, Andrew J.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCena, Jacob Anthony
dc.creatorCena, Jacob Anthonyen_US
dc.date.accessioned2015-03-24T21:48:36Z
dc.date.available2015-03-24T21:48:36Z
dc.date.issued2014
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/347116
dc.description.abstractActivity of skeletal muscles produce electrical signals that can be measured using electrodes placed on the skin surface over a target muscle or with electrodes inserted into the muscle. Such electromyographic (EMG) signals provide fundamental information about the intensity of the neural drive acting upon muscle. In addition, EMG signals are widely deployed as control sources for powered prosthetic limbs. One limitation related to recording EMG signals, however, is that signals arising from neighboring muscles may contribute significantly to the activity detected with electrodes placed over or within a given target muscle. Such unwanted contribution of signal from muscles other than the targeted muscle is referred to as cross-talk. Cross-talk was investigated in four neighboring muscles in the forearm with different electrode types and configurations: bipolar intramuscular, monopolar intramuscular, and bipolar surface EMG. Cross-correlation analysis was performed for every pairwise combination of EMG signal recorded. The peak correlation coefficient at near-zero time delay provided an index of the degree of cross-talk. Correlation coefficients dropped off exponentially with distance between recording electrodes. Bipolar intramuscular EMG had the narrowest pick-up range, with a length constant of 14.5 mm. Bipolar surface EMG had a longer length constant of 37.0 mm, whereas monopolar intramuscular EMG had the longest length constant of 64.5 mm. A second set of experiments indicated that correlation in EMG signals detected in different muscles was unlikely to have a neural basis. Therefore, because of their wide detection range, monopolar configurations including those involving intramuscular electrodes, should be avoided.
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en_US
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.en_US
dc.subjectcross-talken_US
dc.subjectEMGen_US
dc.subjectintramuscularen_US
dc.subjectmonopolaren_US
dc.subjectsurfaceen_US
dc.subjectBiomedical Engineeringen_US
dc.subjectbipolaren_US
dc.titleEvaluation of Cross-talk in Electromyographic Signalsen_US
dc.typetexten
dc.typeElectronic Thesisen
thesis.degree.grantorUniversity of Arizonaen_US
thesis.degree.levelmastersen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberFuglevand, Andrew J.en_US
dc.contributor.committeememberEggers, Erikaen_US
dc.contributor.committeememberFregosi, Ralphen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineGraduate Collegeen_US
thesis.degree.disciplineBiomedical Engineeringen_US
thesis.degree.nameM.S.en_US
refterms.dateFOA2018-08-14T06:32:20Z
html.description.abstractActivity of skeletal muscles produce electrical signals that can be measured using electrodes placed on the skin surface over a target muscle or with electrodes inserted into the muscle. Such electromyographic (EMG) signals provide fundamental information about the intensity of the neural drive acting upon muscle. In addition, EMG signals are widely deployed as control sources for powered prosthetic limbs. One limitation related to recording EMG signals, however, is that signals arising from neighboring muscles may contribute significantly to the activity detected with electrodes placed over or within a given target muscle. Such unwanted contribution of signal from muscles other than the targeted muscle is referred to as cross-talk. Cross-talk was investigated in four neighboring muscles in the forearm with different electrode types and configurations: bipolar intramuscular, monopolar intramuscular, and bipolar surface EMG. Cross-correlation analysis was performed for every pairwise combination of EMG signal recorded. The peak correlation coefficient at near-zero time delay provided an index of the degree of cross-talk. Correlation coefficients dropped off exponentially with distance between recording electrodes. Bipolar intramuscular EMG had the narrowest pick-up range, with a length constant of 14.5 mm. Bipolar surface EMG had a longer length constant of 37.0 mm, whereas monopolar intramuscular EMG had the longest length constant of 64.5 mm. A second set of experiments indicated that correlation in EMG signals detected in different muscles was unlikely to have a neural basis. Therefore, because of their wide detection range, monopolar configurations including those involving intramuscular electrodes, should be avoided.


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
azu_etd_13687_sip1_m.pdf
Size:
2.139Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record