Site-to-site variation of muscle activity and sensitivity in the human anterior temporalis muscle: Implications for contingent stimulation

Abstract

Objective. To evaluate variation of electromyographic (EMG) activity and sensitivity between different sites of anterior temporalis (AT) muscle. Materials and methods. Sixteen healthy subjects (eight men: 28.8 ± 5.2 year old and eight women: 29.1 ± 3.9) participated in one experimental session. EMG activity during masticatory muscle contraction was recorded from nine sites at the AT muscle in a 3 × 3 grid with 1 cm between. The subjects maintained steady 30% of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) using visual feedback. The surface EMG electrode was moved sequentially between these nine test sites and the contractions were repeated. One site was tested four times to assess test–re-test variability. The sensory threshold to electrical stimulation and impedance was also measured at the same sites as the placement of EMG electrodes. Results. The 30% MVC force values did not differ between sites (p = 0.863) or within the same site (p = 0.995) due to the feedback. The EMG activity during 30% MVC was highest at the anterior–superior site (p < 0.05) with a marginal difference within the same site (p = 0.044). Impedance was higher at the posterior–superior, posterior–middle and posterior–inferior sites (p < 0.05). The sensory threshold was highest at the posterior–superior site (p < 0.05). Conclusions. These findings showed that electrodes close to the hairline have higher impedance and sensory thresholds and should be avoided. The anterior–superior site produces the highest EMG activity and lower sensory thresholds and can be recommended as the optimal site to place the electrode for contingent stimulation.

Key Words::

• biofeedback
• contingent stimulation
• electromyography
• sleep bruxism
• temporalis muscle

Acknowledgements

Medotech A/S is thanked for their support to the study. MH is employed by Medotech A/S and PS is chairman of the clinical advisory board.

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.