Article
Electromyography: do the diagnostic ends justify the means?

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(95)80072-7Get rights and content

Abstract

Background:

Physicians are sometimes reluctant to refer patients for electrodiagnostic studies (electromyography with nerve conduction studies [EMG/NCS]) believing the test is too painful and of little benefit.

Methods:

We performed two separate surveys on 126 and 100 consecutive patients referred to our laboratory to determine if EMG/NCS was beneficial to the referring physician and to compare the level of anxiety experienced by patients before the study with the pain actually experienced during the study.

Results:

The electrodiagnosis was discordant from the referring diagnosis in 39% of the patients with an abnormal EMG/NCS. Pretest anxiety levels were low in 59% of the patients, medium in 27%, and high in 14%. After the tests, 82% of the patients said that the test was not as bad as expected, and was generally only mildly painful. Ninety-three responded that they would have the test performed again.

Conclusions:

EMG/NCS often suggest alternative diagnoses, and the actual pain experienced during an EMG/NCS study is significantly less than expected.

References (5)

  • American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine

    Guidelines in electrodiagnostic medicine

    Muscle Nerve

    (1992)
  • KhoshbinS et al.

    Predictors of patients' experience of pain in EMG

    Muscle Nerve

    (1987)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (35)

  • Assessment of Pain During Nerve Conduction Studies in Patients With Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

    2022, Journal of Hand Surgery Global Online
    Citation Excerpt :

    Several previous studies have attempted to research NCS-related pain. A report of 96 patients with peripheral neuropathy undertook a 6-step survey on pain during NCS/EMG; however, the details of the disease conditions were unclear.6 A study including 100 children compared the pain experienced during EMG with that experienced during venipuncture; nevertheless, its accuracy is questionable because of the use of subjective evaluations of children aged 4–17 years.8

  • The usefulness of electrodiagnostic consultation in an outpatient clinic

    2019, Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
    Citation Excerpt :

    It typically starts with the clinical history and neurologic examination, followed by testing to arrive at the right diagnosis [4]. Physicians refer for electrodiagnostic consultation patients with musculoskeletal symptoms who often do not suffer from neuromuscular disease and electrodiagnosis is also discordant with the referring diagnosis in more than one third of patients [5–7]. The motivation of this study was the daily observation of a high proportion of patients referred for electrodiagnostic consultation without a neurological, but with only a symptomatic referral diagnosis and also a high proportion of normal EDX.

  • Current status on electrodiagnostic standards and guidelines in neuromuscular disorders

    2011, Clinical Neurophysiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Outcome studies in electrodiagnostic medicine in patients with neuromuscular disorders are very sparse. A handful of differently designed studies most often on mixed patient groups has looked at the diagnosis reached after the electrodiagnostic study in comparison to the referral diagnosis or referral symptoms (Cho et al., 2004; Cocito et al., 2006; Haig et al., 1999; Kothari et al., 1995, 1998; Nardin et al., 2002; Perry et al., 2009). The percentage of patients in whom the diagnosis had been altered as a consequence of the electrodiagnostic examination ranged from 13% to 60% in the different studies (Table 2) (So, 2009).

  • Diagnostic et prise en charge de la polyneuropathie

    2023, CMAJ. Canadian Medical Association Journal
View all citing articles on Scopus

No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit upon the authors or upon any organization with which the authors are associated.

1

Dr. Kothari is currently with the Division of Neurology, Penn State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA.

View full text