RELIABILITY OF COMPUTERIZED SURFACE ELECTROMYOGRAPHY FOR DETERMINING THE ONSET OF MUSCLE-ACTIVITY
RELIABILITY OF COMPUTERIZED SURFACE ELECTROMYOGRAPHY FOR DETERMINING THE ONSET OF MUSCLE-ACTIVITY
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/ptj/67.1.43
复制
发表时间：
1987-01-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
DIFABIO, RP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
DIFABIO, RP
将用于确定肌肉爆发开始的计算机分析系统（CAS）的可靠性与三名训练有素的检查员的主观评估进行比较。使用测试-再测试范例对 154 个随机选择的、全波整流和滤波的肌电图记录样本进行评估。使用一致性百分比、皮尔逊积矩相关性、方差分析 (ANOVA) 和组内相关系数 (ICC) 来衡量可靠性。评估者之间的一致性（包括计算机化 EMG 评估）仅为 23%。评估者内部一致性和 Pearson 相关系数对于 CAS 来说是完美的。受过培训的审查员的评估者内部评估平均只有 51% 的一致性，但重测相关性很高 (r= .78 -r= .82)。所有 ICC 均具有统计显着性，范围为 0.46 至 0.60，并且当从分析中删除 CAS 发病测定时往往会更高。方差分析显示，与将他们的评估与 CAS 对 EMG 记录的评估进行比较相比，经过培训的检查员之间的一致性更高。然而，这一发现可能是特定于机构的，因为对其他审查员的任何概括都是有限的。与训练有素的检查员相比，CAS 的判断没有变化，确保了试验评估的完美再现性，并且对于分析多通道肌电图记录非常有用。尽管 CAS 可确保完美的可靠性，但有效性确定需要对试验数据进行目视检查。
The reliability of a computerized analysis system (CAS) for determining muscle burst onset was compared with the subjective assessments of three trained examiners. A sample of 154 randomly selected, full-wave rectified and filtered electromyographic recordings was evaluated using a test-retest paradigm. Percentages of agreement, Pearson product-moment correlations, analyses of variance (ANOVAs), and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to measure the reliability. The between-rater agreement, which included the computerized EMG assessments, was only 23%. Within-rater agreement and Pearson correlation coefficients were perfect for CAS. The trained examiners' within-rater assessments averaged only 51% agreement, but test-retest correlations were high (r= .78 -r= .82). All ICCs were statistically significant, ranged from .46 to .60, and tended to be higher when the CAS onset determinations were deleted from the analysis. The ANOVAs revealed that trained examiners were more consistent among each other than when their assessments were compared with CAS assessments of EMG recordings. This finding, however, may be facility-specific in that any generalization to other examiners was limited. In contrast to trained examiners, the CAS was free of variations in judgment, ensured perfect reproducibility of trial assessments, and was highly useful for analyzing multichannel EMG recordings. Although the CAS ensures perfect reliability, validity determinations require visual inspection of trial data.