Jaggi Anju, Malone Alex A, Cowan Joseph, Lambert Simon, Bayley Ian, Cairns Mindy C
Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, UK.
Physiother Res Int. 2009 Mar;14(1):17-29. doi: 10.1002/pri.407.
This pilot study assesses level of agreement between surface and fine-wire electromyography (EMG), in order to establish if surface is as reliable as fine wire in the diagnosis and treatment of abnormal muscle patterning in the shoulder.
Eighteen participants (11 female) with unstable shoulders were recruited after written consent and ethical approval. Anthropometric information and mean skinfold size for triceps, subscapular, biceps and suprailiac sites were obtained. Triple-stud self-adhesive surface electrodes ('Triode'; Thermo Scientific, Physio Med Services, Glossop, Derbyshire, England) were placed over pectoralis major (PM), latissimus dorsi (LD), anterior deltoid (AD) and infraspinatus (IS) at standardized locations. Participants performed five identical uniplanar standard movements (flexion, abduction, external rotation, extension and cross-body adduction). After a 20-minute rest period, a dual-needle technique for fine-wire insertion was performed and the standard movements were repeated. An experienced examiner in each technique reported if muscle activation patterns differed from agreed normal during any movement and were blinded to the other test results. Sensitivity, specificity and Kappa values for level of agreement between methods were calculated for each muscle according to the method of Altman (1991).
Fifteen participants were successfully tested. Sensitivity, specificity and Kappa values between techniques for each muscle were PM (57%, 50%, 0.07), LD (38%, 85%, 0.22), AD (0%, 76%, -0.19) and IS (85%, 75%, 0.6). Only IS demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity and a moderate level of agreement between the two techniques. There was no correlation between skinfold size and agreement levels.
The use of surface EMG may help to classify types of shoulder instability and recognize abnormal muscle patterns. It may allow physiotherapists to direct specific rehabilitation strategies, avoiding strengthening of inappropriate muscles. It has a reasonable degree of confidence to evaluate IS but may have poor sensitivity in detecting abnormal patterns in PM, LD and AD. Further work is required to see if investigator interpretation may have been a factor for the poor level of agreement.
本初步研究评估表面肌电图与细针肌电图(EMG)之间的一致性水平,以确定在肩部异常肌肉模式的诊断和治疗中,表面肌电图是否与细针肌电图一样可靠。
在获得书面同意并经伦理批准后,招募了18名肩部不稳定的参与者(11名女性)。获取了人体测量信息以及肱三头肌、肩胛下、肱二头肌和髂嵴上方部位的平均皮褶厚度。将三电极自粘表面电极(“三极管”;赛默飞世尔科技公司,Physio Med Services,英国德比郡格洛索普)放置在胸大肌(PM)、背阔肌(LD)、三角肌前束(AD)和冈下肌(IS)的标准化位置上。参与者进行了五次相同的单平面标准动作(屈曲、外展、外旋、伸展和体侧内收)。休息20分钟后,采用双针技术插入细针,并重复标准动作。每种技术的一名经验丰富的检查者报告在任何动作过程中肌肉激活模式是否与公认的正常模式不同,且对其他测试结果不知情。根据阿尔特曼(1991年)的方法,计算每种肌肉两种方法之间一致性水平的敏感性、特异性和Kappa值。
15名参与者成功完成测试。每种肌肉两种技术之间的敏感性、特异性和Kappa值分别为:胸大肌(57%,50%,0.07)、背阔肌(38%,85%,0.22)、三角肌前束(0%,76%,-0.19)和冈下肌(85%,75%,0.6)。只有冈下肌在两种技术之间表现出高敏感性和特异性以及中等程度的一致性。皮褶厚度与一致性水平之间无相关性。
表面肌电图的使用可能有助于对肩部不稳定类型进行分类并识别异常肌肉模式。它可能使物理治疗师能够指导特定的康复策略,避免不适当肌肉的强化。在评估冈下肌时它有合理程度的可信度,但在检测胸大肌、背阔肌和三角肌前束的异常模式时可能敏感性较差。需要进一步研究以确定研究者的解读是否可能是一致性水平较低的一个因素。