ArticleCureus2024
Determining the Optimal Position of Surface Electrodes for Diaphragm Electromyography: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPlacing electrodes on different aspects of the chest determines the motor firing from the diaphragm. The electrode placement close to the extent of the muscle gave promising readings as compared to the ones that were placed away. The position with the maximum amplitude and least duration was chosen. Positions of the electrodes were decided as per the extent of the muscle. The aim is to determine the appropriate position of surface electrodes for surface diaphragm electromyography (EMG). MATERIAL AND METHODOLOGY: Thirty healthy individuals of age ranging from 21 to 45 years were included in the study. Participants were made to lie down in a supine position and different positions like G1 (recording electrode) 5 cm superior to the tip of the xiphoid process and G2 (reference) 16 cm along the costal margin from G1, G1 over the xiphoid tip and G2 at the seventh intercostal space at the costochondral junction and G1 over the xiphoid tip and G2 at the eight intercostal space at the costochondral junction were used for assessing maximum amplitudes and durations were observed by using a Octopus New Wave EMG machine (Octopus Medical Technologies, Vadodara, IND). After observing all the positions, an optimum position for maximum amplitude and least duration was analyzed.
resultsAs per the study, out of the four positions, the electrode placements on the tip of the xiphoid process and 16 cm away diagonally on the sixth intercostal space showed maximum amplitude and the least duration with maximum mean amplitude and less mean duration of 232.35 and 7.316. On the seventh intercostal space it was 199.15 and 7.887 and on the eighth intercostal space was 176.055 and 8.639. The tip of the xiphoid process and 16 cm away diagonally on the sixth intercostal space is chosen as the appropriate position for electrode placement for EMG of the diaphragm.
conclusionWe conclude that the best electrode position was when the electrodes were placed 5 cm superior to the xiphoid process, i.e., G1, and 16 cm away from the recording electrode on the costochondral junction, i.e., G2, at the sixth intercostal space. Ground electrode placement is the nearest bony prominence, i.e., xiphisternum.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.