Evaluation of measurement strategies to increase the reliability of EMG indices to assess back muscle fatigue and recovery

The purpose of this study was to assess different measurement strategies to increase the reliability of different electromyographic (EMG) indices developed for the assessment of back muscle impairments. Forty male volunteers (20 controls and 20 chronic low back pain patients) were assessed on three sessions at least 2 days apart within 2 weeks. Sur-face EMG signals were recorded from four pairs (bilaterally) of back muscles (multifidus at the L5 level, iliocostalis lumborum at L3, and longissimus at L1 and T10) while the subjects performed, in a static dynamometer, two static trunk extension tasks at 75% of the maximal voluntary contraction separated by a 60 s rest period: (1) a 30 s fatigue task and (2) a 5 s recovery task. Different EMG indices (based on individual muscles or averaged across bilateral homologous muscles or across all muscles) were computed to evaluate muscular fatigue and recovery. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and standard error of measurement (SEM) in percentage of the grand mean were calculated for each EMG variable. Reliable EMG indices are achieved for both healthy and chronic low back pain subjects when (1) electrodes are positioned on medial back muscles (multifidus at the L5 level and longissimus at L1) and (2) measures are averaged across bilateral muscles and/or across two fatigue tests performed within a session. The most reliable EMG indices were the bilateral average of medial back muscles (ICC range: 0.68-0.91; SEM range: 5-35%) and the average of all back muscles (ICC range: 0.77-0.91 SEM range: 5-30%). The averaging of measures across two fatigue tests is predicted to increase the reliability by about 13%. With regards to EMG indices of fatigue, the identification of the most fatigable muscle also lead to satisfactory results (ICC range: 0.74-0.79; SEM range: 21-26%). The assessment of back muscle impairments through EMG analysis necessitates the use of multiple electrodes to achieve reliable results. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.