DSpace Repository

Mechanomyography Sensors for Muscle Assessment: a Brief Review

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Islam, Anamul
dc.contributor.author Sundaraj, Kenneth
dc.contributor.author Ahmad, Badlishah
dc.contributor.author Ahamed, Nizam Uddin
dc.contributor.author Ali, Asraf
dc.date.accessioned 2018-09-18T06:32:23Z
dc.date.accessioned 2019-05-27T09:57:00Z
dc.date.available 2018-09-18T06:32:23Z
dc.date.available 2019-05-27T09:57:00Z
dc.date.issued 2012
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11948/3230
dc.description.abstract There are three mechanomyography terminologies that are commonly used: acoustic myography, vibromyography, and phonomyography. There is no clear evidence concerning the sensors used among these terminologies. Thus the purpose of this review is to identify these three terminologies in terms of the implemented sensors, frequency ranges, and muscle assessment applications. [Methods] Thus, we first performed a systematic search of all the articles published up to April 15, 2012 in the IEEE, Elsevier, PubMed, Springer Link, and Wiley Online Library databases using various combinations of the focused keywords. We then read the articles found in the search and selected papers related to these three technologies. After analysis, 32 articles were extracted to meet our objective. [Results] In turn, we determined that 100% and 54% of the studies of phonomyography and acoustic myography, respectively, utilized a microphone as the sensory device, whereas 91% of the articles on vibromyography detected the signal through an accelerometer. The remaining 46% of the acoustic myography studies recorded the signal through different types of sensors. In addition, acoustic myography was mostly applied to the study of muscle fatigue and the control of externally powered prostheses. Similarly, vibromyography was implemented in the monitoring of muscle fatigue, balance, contraction force, and effort. Phonomyography, however, was generally performed to study neuromuscular blockade in a clinical environment. Furthermore, no specific and distinct frequency ranges were found for the sensors associated with the terminologies. [Conclusion] Hence, the findings of this review may prove useful in the selection of suitable sensors for assessing different muscles. Full Text Link: https://doi.org/10.1589/jpts.24.1359 en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher J-Stage en_US
dc.subject Mechanomyography en_US
dc.subject Muscle-assessment en_US
dc.subject sensor en_US
dc.title Mechanomyography Sensors for Muscle Assessment: a Brief Review en_US
dc.type Article en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Browse

My Account

Statistics