Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2022 Aug 30;11(17):5120. doi: 10.3390/jcm11175120

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© 2022 by the authors.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

PMC Copyright notice

Representative EMG responses of rectus femoris (RF) m. and medial gastrocnemius (mGM) m. evoked by percutaneous scES. The EMG was tested at 2 Hz, 150 µs, and amplitude of current that progressed from 2.5 volts (visible EMG response without visible muscle contractions; (A)), 5 volts (visible muscle twitches; (B)), and 7.5 volts (strong visible twitches; (C)). The EMG data were presented in a filtered format to highlight the distinct responses for both muscle groups. The A1 program was used as a part of Sayenko’s approach before detecting the migration of the left lead. Our results are in agreement with previous findings that noted that the voltage range of 3–8 volts resulted in biased and non-selective stimulation of the RF and mGM muscles. Note the EMG magnitude of rectus femoris m. compared to the medial GM muscle. *, EMG recordings of the right RF muscle was not recorded at 7.5 volts due to a technical error.