Display options
Cite
Lo Martire R, Gladh K, Westman A, et al. Neck Muscle EMG-Force Relationship and Its Reliability During Isometric Contractions. Sports Med Open. 2017;3(1):16doi: 10.1186/s40798-017-0083-2.
Lo Martire, R., Gladh, K., Westman, A., & Äng, B. O. (2017). Neck Muscle EMG-Force Relationship and Its Reliability During Isometric Contractions. Sports medicine - open, 3(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-017-0083-2
Lo Martire, Riccardo, et al. "Neck Muscle EMG-Force Relationship and Its Reliability During Isometric Contractions." Sports medicine - open vol. 3,1 (2017): 16. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-017-0083-2
Lo Martire R, Gladh K, Westman A, Äng BO. Neck Muscle EMG-Force Relationship and Its Reliability During Isometric Contractions. Sports Med Open. 2017 Dec;3(1):16. doi: 10.1186/s40798-017-0083-2. Epub 2017 Apr 14. PMID: 28411326; PMCID: PMC5392189.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Sports Med Open. 2017 Dec;3(1):16. doi: 10.1186/s40798-017-0083-2. Epub 2017 Apr 14.

Neck Muscle EMG-Force Relationship and Its Reliability During Isometric Contractions.

Sports medicine - open

Riccardo Lo Martire, Kristofer Gladh, Anton Westman, Björn O Äng

Affiliations

  1. Division of Physiotherapy, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences, and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Alfred Nobels allé 23 100, Huddinge, 141 83, Sweden. [email protected].
  2. Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. [email protected].
  3. Department of Aeronautical and Vehicle Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden. [email protected].
  4. Division of Physiotherapy, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences, and Society, Karolinska Institutet, Alfred Nobels allé 23 100, Huddinge, 141 83, Sweden.
  5. Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
  6. Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, Sweden.
  7. School of Education, Health and Social Studies, Dalarna University, Falun, Sweden.

PMID: 28411326 PMCID: PMC5392189 DOI: 10.1186/s40798-017-0083-2

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Susceptible to injury, the neck is subject to scientific investigations, frequently aiming to elucidate possible injury mechanisms via surface electromyography (EMG) by indirectly estimating cervical loads. Accurate estimation requires that the EMG-force relationship is known and that its measurement error is quantified. Hence, this study examined the relationship between EMG and isometric force amplitude of the anterior neck (AN), the upper posterior neck (UPN), and the lower posterior neck (LPN) and then assessed the relationships' test-retest reliability across force-percentiles within and between days.

METHODS: EMG and force data were sampled from 18 participants conducting randomly ordered muscle contractions at 5-90% of maximal voluntary force during three trials over 2 days. EMG-force relationships were modeled with general linear mixed-effects regression. Overall fitted lines' between-trial discrepancies were evaluated. Finally, the reliability of participants' fitted regression lines was quantified by an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the standard error of measurement (SEM).

RESULTS: A rectilinear model had the best fit for AN while positively oriented quadratic models had the best fit for UPN and LPN, with mean adjusted conditional coefficients of determination and root mean square errors of 0.97-0.98 and 4-5%, respectively. Overall EMG-force relationships displayed a maximum 6% between-trial discrepancy and over 20% of maximal force, and mean ICC was above 0.79 within day and 0.27-0.61 between days across areas. Corresponding SEM was below 12% both within and between days across areas, excluding UPN between days, for which SEM was higher.

CONCLUSIONS: EMG-force relationships were elucidated for three neck areas, and provided models allow inferences to be drawn from EMG to force on a group level. Reliability of EMG-force relationship models was higher within than between days, but typically acceptable for all but the lowest contraction intensities, and enables adjustment for measurement imprecision in future studies.

Keywords: Biomechanics; Cervical spine; Electromyography; Moment; Muscle activity; Semispinalis capitis; Splenius capitis; Sternocleidomastoideus; Torque

References

  1. Lancet. 2012 Dec 15;380(9859):2163-96 - PubMed
  2. J Orthop Res. 1988;6(5):713-20 - PubMed
  3. Br J Sports Med. 2005 Jun;39(6):314-8 - PubMed
  4. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999 Jul 1;24(13):1343-8 - PubMed
  5. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1988 May;3(2):58-65 - PubMed
  6. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998 Jun 15;23(12):1314-23 - PubMed
  7. Am J Sports Med. 2014 Mar;42(3):566-76 - PubMed
  8. Sports Med. 2000 Jul;30(1):1-15 - PubMed
  9. Eur Spine J. 2006 Jun;15(6):834-48 - PubMed
  10. J Spinal Disord. 1992 Dec;5(4):383-9; discussion 397 - PubMed
  11. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2004 Apr;96(4):1486-95 - PubMed
  12. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2000 Oct;10(5):361-74 - PubMed
  13. Exp Brain Res. 1989;75(2):335-44 - PubMed
  14. Clin Neurophysiol. 2007 Aug;118(8):1802-14 - PubMed
  15. Br J Sports Med. 2015 Apr;49(8):511-9 - PubMed
  16. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1993 Apr-May;33(3):161-6 - PubMed
  17. J Biomech Eng. 2008 Jun;130(3):031014 - PubMed
  18. Med J Aust. 2009 Apr 6;190(7):353-6 - PubMed
  19. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1994;68(1):92-101 - PubMed
  20. J Sci Med Sport. 2009 Nov;12(6):614-21 - PubMed
  21. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2016 Mar;26(3):307-16 - PubMed
  22. Orthop J Sports Med. 2015 Jan 08;3(1):2325967114564358 - PubMed
  23. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998 Feb 15;23(4):412-22 - PubMed
  24. J Evol Biol. 2011 Apr;24(4):699-711 - PubMed
  25. J Sports Sci. 2001 Mar;19(3):171-9 - PubMed
  26. J Strength Cond Res. 2005 Feb;19(1):231-40 - PubMed

Publication Types