Skip to main content
Log in

SEMG Evaluations: An Overview

  • Published:
Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article reviews the current techniques of surface electromyography (SEMG) assessment. Discussed are static, dynamic, and combination assessment techniques and the rational for their use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Basmajian, J. (1967). Muscles alive: Their function revealed by Electromyography (2nd ed.) Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Basmajian, J., & DeLuca, C. (1985). Muscles alive: Their function revealed by electromyography (5th ed.) Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budzynski, T., Stoyva, J., Adler, C., & Mullaney, D. (1973). EMG biofeedback and tension headache: A controlled outcome study. Psychosomatic Medicine, 35, 484-496.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chu-Andrews, J., & Johnson, R. J. (1986). Electrodiagnosis: An anatomical and clinical approach. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colloca, C. J., & Keller, T. S. (2001). Electromyographic reflex responses to mechanical force, manually assisted spinal manipulative therapy. Spine, 26, 1117-1124.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cram, J. R. (1986). Clinical EMG: Muscle scanning and diagnostic manual for surface recordings. Seattle, WA: Clinical Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cram, J. R., & Engstrom, D. (1986). Patterns of neuromuscular activity in pain and non-pain patients. Clinical Biofeedback and Health, 9, 55-61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cram, J., Kasman, G., & Holtz, J. (1998). Introduction to surface electromyography. Maryland: Aspen Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, C. C. S., & Donaldson, M. (1990). Multi-channel EMG assessment and treatment techniques. In J. Cram (Ed.), Clinical EMG for surface recordings (Vol. 2). Seattle, WA: Clinical Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, C. C. S., Skubick, D., Clasby, R., & Cram, J. (1994). The evaluation of trigger-point activity using dynamic EMG techniques. American Journal of Pain Management, 4, 118-122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, C. C. S., Snelling, L. S., MacInnis, A. L., Sella, G. E., & Mueller, H. H. (2002). Diffuse muscular coactivation (DMC) as a potential source of pain in fibromyalgia—Part 1. NeuroRehabilitation, 17.

  • Keller, T. S., & Colloca, C. J. (2000). Mechanical force spinal manipulation increases trunk muscle strength assessed by electromyography: A comparative clinical trial. Journal of Manipulative Physiological Therapy, 23, 585-595.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, C., Moritani, H., Hirschfeld, & Forssberg, H. (1990). Deficits in reciporal inhibition of children with cerebral palsy as revealed by H reflex testing. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 32, 974-984.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. J. (1995). The validity of thoracolumbar paraspinal scanning EMG as a diagnostic test: An examination of the current literature. Journal of Manipulative Physiological Therapy, 18, 482-484.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sella, G. E. (2000a). Muscular dynamics: Electromyography assessment of energy and motion. Martins Ferry, OH: GENMED Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sella, G. E. (2000b). Surface electromyography testing: Sensitivity, specificy, positive and negative predicitive values. Europa Medico-physica, 36, 183-190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sihvonen, T., Partanen, J., Hanninen, O., & Soimaakallio, S. (1991). Electric behavior of low back muscles during lumbar pelvic rhythm in low back pain patients and healthy controls. Archives of Physical Medicine Rehabilitation, 72, 1080-1086.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skubick, D., Clasby, R., Donaldson, C. C. S., & Marshall, W. (1993). Carpal tunnel syndrome as an expression of muscular dysfunction in the neck. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 3, 31-44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Travell, J., & Simons, D. (1983). Myofascial pain and dysfunction: The trigger point manual. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Triano, J. J. (1994). The validity of thoracolumbar paraspinal scanning EMG as a diagnostic test: Examination of the current literature. Journal of Manipulative Physiological Therapy, 17, 539-551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, S. L., & Basmajian, J. V. (1978). Assessment of paraspinal electromyographic activity in normal subjects and in chronic back pain patients using a muscle biofeedback device. In E. Asmussen & K. Jorgensen (Eds.), International series on biomechanics (VIB, pp. 319-324).

  • Wolf, S. L., Nacht, M., & Kelly, J. L. (1982). EMG feedback training during dynamic movement for low back pain patients. Behavior Therapy, 13, 395-406.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stuart Donaldson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Donaldson, S., Donaldson, M. & Snelling, L. SEMG Evaluations: An Overview. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback 28, 121–127 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023858524879

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023858524879

Navigation