Ultrasound Effects on Electroneuromyographic Measures In Sensory Fibers of the Median Nerve
Andrew B. Cosentino, David L. Cross, Raymond J. Harrington, Gary L. Soderberg
Physical Therapy 1983 · 10.1093/ptj/63.11.1788
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to clarify the available literature and study the influence of ultrasound on the conduction velocity and amplitude of evoked sensory potentials in the median nerve. Thirteen subjects were assigned to either Experimental or Control Groups for ultrasound or placebo treatments. We compared sensory-nerve conduction velocity in the median nerve after 10 minutes of ultrasound treatment at three intensity levels (0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 W/cm2) with sensory-nerve conduction velocity in the median nerve after 10 minutes of placebo ultrasound treatment (0.0 W/cm2). No significant differences were noted between groups at any of the three ultrasound intensity levels, nor were the interaction effects significant. A hypothetical model, based on the available literature, proposes that ultrasound-induced changes in sensory-nerve conduction velocity may not progress in a direct linear fashion relative to the duration of treatment.
Abstract via europepmc.
Exposures
Exposure 1: Therapeutic ultrasound applied to forearm overlying the median nerve
Target: median nerve — “median nerve”
Device: other named manufacturer · Rich-Mar Corporation · Rich-Mar VI Ultrasound unit ✓
| Waveform | not reported | |
|---|---|---|
| Fundamental frequency (kHz) | 1,000 | ✓✓✓ |
| Pulse duration (ms) | not reported | |
| Pulse repetition frequency (Hz) | not reported | |
| Duty cycle (%) | not reported | |
| Sonication duration (s) | 600 | ✓✓✓ |
| Free-field pressure (kPa) | not reported | |
|---|---|---|
| Free-field Isppa (W/cm²) | not reported | |
| Free-field Ispta (W/cm²) | not reported | |
| In-situ estimate | not reported | |
| In-situ pressure (kPa) | not reported | |
| In-situ Isppa (W/cm²) | not reported | |
| In-situ Ispta (W/cm²) | not reported | |
| Ispta, domain unspecified (W/cm²) | 0.5, 1, 1.5swept | ✓✓✓ |
After determining the pretest values, either ultrasound treatment of 0.5, 1.0, or 1.5 W/cm2 for 10 minutes or placebo ultrasound treatment of 0.0 W/cm2 for 10 minutes was applied to experimental and control subjects, respectively. The ultrasound was applied at a rate of about 6 cm/sec using a counterclockwise circular motion for a distance of 25 to 40 cm, depending on the length of the subject's mid forearm. Treatments were administered with minimal intervals of 48 hours.
Flags from extraction
exposures[0].unspecified_domain.isppa_w_cm2— Paper reports only 'ultrasound intensity' in W/cm^2 (device moved over skin) without specifying ISPPA, ISPTA or SATA; recorded here as isppa_w_cm2 for schema compliance.exposures[0].timing.waveform— Paper does not state whether the Rich-Mar VI unit was operated in continuous or pulsed mode.sham_type— Classified as inactive_transducer because the control arm received 'placebo ultrasound treatment (0.0 W/cm2)', i.e. the same device/procedure with zero acoustic output; the paper gives no further detail of how the placebo was produced.