↓ Skip to main content

Muscle motor point identification is essential for optimizing neuromuscular electrical stimulation use

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
152 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
296 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Muscle motor point identification is essential for optimizing neuromuscular electrical stimulation use
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1743-0003-11-17
Pubmed ID
Authors

Massimiliano Gobbo, Nicola A Maffiuletti, Claudio Orizio, Marco A Minetto

Abstract

Transcutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation applied in clinical settings is currently characterized by a wide heterogeneity of stimulation protocols and modalities. Practitioners usually refer to anatomic charts (often provided with the user manuals of commercially available stimulators) for electrode positioning, which may lead to inconsistent outcomes, poor tolerance by the patients, and adverse reactions. Recent evidence has highlighted the crucial importance of stimulating over the muscle motor points to improve the effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation. Nevertheless, the correct electrophysiological definition of muscle motor point and its practical significance are not always fully comprehended by therapists and researchers in the field. The commentary describes a straightforward and quick electrophysiological procedure for muscle motor point identification. It consists in muscle surface mapping by using a stimulation pen-electrode and it is aimed at identifying the skin area above the muscle where the motor threshold is the lowest for a given electrical input, that is the skin area most responsive to electrical stimulation. After the motor point mapping procedure, a proper placement of the stimulation electrode(s) allows neuromuscular electrical stimulation to maximize the evoked tension, while minimizing the dose of the injected current and the level of discomfort. If routinely applied, we expect this procedure to improve both stimulation effectiveness and patient adherence to the treatment.The aims of this clinical commentary are to present an optimized procedure for the application of neuromuscular electrical stimulation and to highlight the clinical implications related to its use.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 296 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 290 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 50 17%
Student > Master 40 14%
Student > Bachelor 34 11%
Researcher 29 10%
Student > Postgraduate 19 6%
Other 66 22%
Unknown 58 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 20%
Engineering 51 17%
Sports and Recreations 34 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 27 9%
Neuroscience 20 7%
Other 32 11%
Unknown 73 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 February 2017.
All research outputs
#6,459,565
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#340
of 1,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,907
of 238,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#9
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,424 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 238,029 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.