Advertisement

Evaluation in Biofeedback Training System on Displays

  • Tomoki Shiozawa
  • Masaru Miyao
  • Meiho Nakayama
  • Hiroki Takada
Chapter
Part of the Current Topics in Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine book series (CTEHPM)

Abstract

Electromyograms (EMGs) are affected by the location of the measuring electrodes and the shape and size of the probes. Therefore, EMG evaluation is macroscopic and subjective, and no algorithm has yet been devised for quantifying the degree of muscular abnormality or recovery. We have developed measurement parameters for evaluating the average rectified surface EMG (sEMG) data obtained from perineal muscles during biofeedback training (BFT) of patients with dysuria and of patients who are prone to falling. This evaluation of new parameters is intended to serve as a statistical technique that uses EMG signals. We have already evaluated the effects of BFT using this novel sensor output signal evaluation (SOE) system. In this study, a combination of SOE systems is developed to make their useful application emerge.

Keywords

Electromyograms (EMGs) Biofeedback training (BFT) Sensor output signal evaluation (SOE) system 

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work was supported in part by a ground-based study proposal for the fiscal years 2005–2007 (17659189).

References

  1. 1.
    Galvani L. De Viribus Electricitatis in Motu Musculari Commentaries. De Bononiensi Scientiarum et Artium Instituto Atque Academia Commentarii. 1791;7:363–418.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cybernetics WN. The technology press. New York: Wiley; 1948.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Akazawa K. Bioinformatic engineering. Tokyo: Tokyo Denki University Press; 2001.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kizuka T, Masuda T, Kiryu T, Sadoyama T. Practical usage of surface electromyography. Tokyo: Tokyo Denki University Press; 2006. p. 65–92.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Peek CJ. A primer of biofeedback instrumentation. In: Schwartz MS, Andrasik F, editors. Biofeedback. New York: Guilford Press; 1995. p. 597–629.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jacobson E. Progressive relaxation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1938.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gatchel RJ, Price KP. Critical applications of biofeedback. New York: Pergamon Press; 1979.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gaarder KR, Montgomery PS. Clinical biofeedback: a procedural manual for behavioral medicine. 2nd ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1981.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Basmajian S. An anthology of visual poetry and collage. Toronto: Sober Minute Press; 1989.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shiozawa T, Takada H, Miyao M, inventors. Sensor output signal evaluation system. Japan Patent P2006-111387; 2006.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shiozawa T, Takada H, Miyao M, inventors. Sensor output signal evaluation system. PCT Patent Publication No. WO, 2007/129452; 2007.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Takada H, Watanabe Y, Shiozawa T, Kawasaki H. Quantitative evaluation of stability in surface electromyography for perineal muscle during biofeedback training. Clin Neurophysiol. 2006;117:S280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Takada H, Shiozawa T, Takada M, Iwase S, Miyao M. Evaluating indices of age-related muscle performance by using surface electromyography. In: Proceedings of the 31st annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society; 2009. p. 6271–5.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Takada H, Shiozawa T, Miyao M, Matsuura Y, Takada M. Consideration of indices to evaluate age-related muscle performance by using surface electromyography. In: Arabnia HR, editor. Advances in computational biology. New York: Springer; 2010. p. 585–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Takada H, Takada M, Matsuura Y, Miyao M, Shiozawa T. Study of surface electromyography and its indices to evaluate muscular control. Forma. 2014;29:S29–36.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Takada H, Morimoto T, Tsunashima H, Yamazaki T, Hoshina H, Miyao M. Applications of double-wayland algorithm to detect anomalous signals. Forma. 2006;21:159–67.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Takada H, Matsuura Y, Miyao M, Shiozawa T. Nonlinear analysis for evaluation of age-related muscle performance using surface electromyography. In: Schwartz M, editor. EMG method for evaluation muscle and nerve function. Croatia: InTech; 2011. p. 91–106.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Takada H, Matsuura Y, Miyao M. Effectiveness of new technology to compose stereoscopic movies. In: Aamir SM, editor. Depth map and 3D imaging applications: algorithms and technologies. Hershey: IGI Global; 2011. p. 286–306.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kobayashi S, inventor. Eye sight recovering apparatus. Japan Patent 6-339501; 1994.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Miyazaki S, Yamada N, Okawa M. Somnology II. Overview and management of sleep disorders. Kyoto: Kitaohji Syobo; 2011. p. 2–9.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sasai T, Inoue Y. PSG recording for REM sleep behavior disorders and pitfalls of determination. Jpn J Sleep Med. 2012;6:497–502.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Takada H, Kinoshita F, Ikeda K, Imaeda T, Tanimura T, Jono Y, Nakayama M, Takada M. On metric space for discrimination by using an artificial algorithm imitating the empirical rule – as an example of support to classify REM Sleep Behavior Disorder. Forma. 2018;33(Suppl) (in press).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yoshida H, Ujiie H, Ishimura K, Wada M. The estimation of muscle fatigue using chaos analysis. J Soc Biomech. 2004;28:201–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Takada H, Shiozawa T, Miyao M, Matsuura Y, Takada M. Consideration of indices to evaluate age-related muscle performance by using surface electromyography. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2010;680:585–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kimura J. Electrodiagnosis in diseases of nerve and muscles: principles and practice. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Oxford University Press; 1989. p. 209–304.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Soderberg GL. Recording techniques. In: US department of health and human services centers for disease control, Selected topics in surface electromyography for use in the occupational setting expert perspective. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 1992. p. 23–41.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    De Luca CJ. The use of surface electromyography in biomechanics. J Appl Biomech. 1997;13:135–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Saridis GN, Gootee TP. EMG pattern analysis and classification for a prosthetic arm. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1982;29:403–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wootten ME, Kadaba MP, Cochran GVB. Dynamic electromyography. II. Normal patterns during gait. J Orthop Res. 1990;8:247–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Delisle A, Larivière C, Imbeau D, Durand MJ. Physical exposure of sign language interpreters: baseline measures and reliability analysis. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2005;94:448–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tomoki Shiozawa
    • 1
  • Masaru Miyao
    • 2
  • Meiho Nakayama
    • 3
  • Hiroki Takada
    • 4
  1. 1.Health Administration Center and School of Business AdministrationAoyama Gakuin UniversityTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Kagawa Nutrition UniversitySakadoJapan
  3. 3.Good Sleep CenterNagoya City University HospitalNagoyaJapan
  4. 4.Department of Human and Artificial Intelligent Systems, Faculty of EngineeringUniversity of FukuiFukuiJapan

Personalised recommendations